Road of the Patriarch

unknownuser

Salam...

I believe in the existance of Malai'ka, which are divine agents / forces appointed by the Creator to serve certain functions (causing earthquakes, volcanoes, floods, carrying messages of Allah, taking souls upon death, etc...). I also believe that these malai'ka can take human form (as per the strange-looking guests of Abraham).

Also, these malai'ka are probably the reason why there is the pronoun "we" in the Quran. And if we read the verses carefully, we can note that Allah CANNOT possibly be the one speaking, but rather it was them...the malai'ka of revelation. Here is one of the most obvious examples of this Quranic phenomenon

{And we are not sent except by the authority of your Rabb. To Him are our present and our future, and all that is in-between. And your Rabb was never to forget * The Rabb of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them. So serve Him and be patient in His service. Do you know anything that is like Him?}...

Who is the one speaking here? I think it's obvious who this "we" is. Allah would never say "YOUR Rabb" (in the 3rd person perspective) when addressing Muhammad.

My 2 cents...

Anyway, since we mentioned the "guests" of Abraham, I was having a comical discussion with a Sunni about 10 days ago, and towards the end, I asked him about the following verses

{And his wife was standing, so she laughed when We gave her the good news of Ishac, and after Ishac, Yaqoub * She said "O my! Shall I give birth when I am an old woman, and here is my husband an old man? This is indeed a strange thing!" * They said "Do you wonder at the decree of Allah? The mercy of Allah and blessings are upon you O People of the Sanctuary. He is Praiseworthy, Glorious."}...

Q Who is the wife who was given tidings that she would bear Isaac?
A Sarah.
Q Where did Sarah live?
A In Palestine
Q Really? If she was in Palestine, then why did the malai'ka salute her and her husband as "People of the Sanctuary"? Which "Sanctuary" is being mentioned here?

His face turned purple, and he stormed out of the room, and I haven't seen or heard from him since then.

The story of seperating Ibraheem's family into 2 branches, one in Palestine (Sarah and her son Ishac) and one in Makkah (Hagar and her son Ismaeel) and having Ibraheem travel back and forth between the two on the back of a winged horse, is the most spectacular evidence of forgery in the Muslim creed.

There is absolutely ZERO evidence of this division in the Quran. Why would Ibraheem, who was made an imam (guide) for the people of his time, and who dedicated his life to serving the Sanctuary which he cleansed of idols, travel back to Palestine to die and be burried there? What is the purpose? Didn't the Patriarch, in his supplications to Allah, say

{And Ibraheem said "My Rabb, make this a peaceful land, and keep me and my sons away from serving idols}...

Was this prayer intended only for Ismaeel's progeny? What about Ishac? Isn't he also an inhabitant of that land? or was he in Palestine?

Didn't Abraham, after having cleansed that valley of idols, and become a beacon for the people of his age, who would flock to him during the Hajj seasons, thank Allah by saying

{Praise be to Allah, who has granted me in my old age Ismaeel and Ishac; my Rabb is Hearer of the prayer}...

So where were his sons then?

I defy any Sunni or Shiite on this planet to give me a logical answer to these questions.

As for the e-books, I expect the first one to be completed during Ramadan of this year.

Peace and blessings to all...

johan

Yes, especially this.

Why call us aliens then? By this point we're pretty damn naturalised.

Does it matter where heaven is? It's not as if we're going to get there in our lifetime.

Not sure what you mean by being naturalised..
But if we are alien in that we weren't created on earth, couldn't that be plausible proposition?

how do you know for sure if our lifetime doesn't warrant us to witness heaven?
how about this verse

Sahih International
O People, if you should be in doubt about the Resurrection, then indeed, We created you from dust, then from a sperm-drop, then from a clinging clot, and then from a lump of flesh, formed and unformed - that We may show you. And We settle in the wombs whom We will for a specified term, then We bring you out as a child, and then that you may reach your maturity. And among you is he who is taken in death, and among you is he who is returned to the most decrepit age so that he knows, after knowledge, nothing. And you see the earth barren, but when We send down upon it rain, it quivers and swells and grows of every beautiful kind.

what if at the time of resurrection, there are people who are still alive..?
after all 3eesa AS was able to resurrect the dead in the pass, and there are chances that he hasn't died and will come back in the future to complete the task of resurrection?

wallahua3lam

savage_carrot

Not sure what you mean by being naturalised..
But if we are alien in that we weren't created on earth, couldn't that be plausible proposition?
It's pretty obvious what I mean. There's a huge if involved and not sure I'd call it very plausible.

If you want to continue, please start a new thread in an appropriate section.

how do you know for sure if our lifetime doesn't warrant us to witness heaven?
how about this verse
Quote

Sahih International
O People, if you should be in doubt about the Resurrection, then indeed, We created you from dust, then from a sperm-drop, then from a clinging clot, and then from a lump of flesh, formed and unformed - that We may show you. And We settle in the wombs whom We will for a specified term, then We bring you out as a child, and then that you may reach your maturity. And among you is he who is taken in death, and among you is he who is returned to the most decrepit age so that he knows, after knowledge, nothing. And you see the earth barren, but when We send down upon it rain, it quivers and swells and grows of every beautiful kind.

what if at the time of resurrection, there are people who are still alive..?
after all 3eesa AS was able to resurrect the dead in the pass, and there are chances that he hasn't died and will come back in the future to complete the task of resurrection?
Your point here is that this verse is telling us we might be able to witness heaven during our lifetime? Unless you're Belinda Carlisle, it's clear that the verse says nothing of the sort. According to 2957, we must die before the rest of the process ( i.e. resurrection => judgement => heaven/hell/etc). Is there a verse anywhere that shows someone jumping the queue so to say?

Secondly...wait what? Isa isn't dead? Right...this topic is better suited to an appropriate category. Please start a new thread there.

johan

It's pretty obvious what I mean. There's a huge if involved and not sure I'd call it very plausible.

If you want to continue, please start a new thread in an appropriate section.
Your point here is that this verse is telling us we might be able to witness heaven during our lifetime? Unless you're Belinda Carlisle, it's clear that the verse says nothing of the sort. According to 2957, we must die before the rest of the process ( i.e. resurrection => judgement => heaven/hell/etc). Is there a verse anywhere that shows someone jumping the queue so to say?

what if reincarnation is possible according to Quran?
http//rose-sufi-crescent.blogspot.com/2007/02/islam-sufism-and-reincarnation.html

Secondly...wait what? Isa isn't dead? Right...this topic is better suited to an appropriate category. Please start a new thread there.

after you..

peace

Lena

Salaam Pazuzu I have just come across your thread. I grew more and more excited with each post I read - couldn't stop reading until I came to the last post. I can only echo what others have said, your research and pursuit of the evidence is astounding and inspiring and courageous bravo bravo bravo bravo bravo bravo

I have been doing a lot of reading on the history and pre history of the Arabian tribes and how they originated in Yemen, the fighting between Adnani & Qatani tribes from Yemen and how the Adnani moved north into the Hijaz area. Also I read that Muhammeds genealogy is said to be from the Adnani tribe of Yemen. Another interesting bit of information is that the urban Hijazi dialect shows links with north Sudan and Upper Egypt (there is also other influences as a result of the Ottaman Empire ruling over the Hijaz), and the Bedouin hijazi dialect shows links with Jordan and Sinai.

I have some questions

So who are the Hijazi Arabs that doctored the history to suit themselves? (They must have been the victors, as the victors get to rewrite the history books but they were the victors over who?)
Alternatively, why would Hijazi Arabs who come from the Adnani tribes of Yemen deny and falsify there own history?
What happened to the Yemeni tribe of Israel?
Did they stay in Yemen and get wiped out, or did they move into the Hijaz area or go to Ethiopia or somewhere else?
Were they Yemeni Arabs or did they come from somewhere else and settle in Yemen?
Arabs were they an Adnani or Qatani tribe?
Is there a relationship between the word Hud, Yahuda and Jew?
Are the Jewish people an entirely different people than the Israelites that are from Yemen?
Are there any links between the semitic Akkadians who moved from Arabia to Iraq 4,000 years ago, and defeated the Babylonians (a non-semitic people) and any events in Quran?

May God guide us on the right path.
Lena

savage_carrot

what if reincarnation is possible according to Quran?
http//rose-sufi-crescent.blogspot.com/2007/02/islam-sufism-and-reincarnation.html
after you..

peace

It's been done to death, sorry.

johan

It's been done to death, sorry.

please refer me to the verdict..

peace,
Johan

savage_carrot

Far be it from me to be the judge, jury and executioner...use the search function.

cleanfox5982

Is there a relationship between the word Hud, Yahuda and Jew?

May God guide us on the right path.
Lena

Salam Lena ,

have a look into the link below it has some clarification about your above inquiries , i would say that there are still many bricks and investigation to add to this puzzle in particular and to the people and the land of the book in general , major direction is being put by the excellent research of member Pazuzu but the puzzle still need many sharpness and bricks to add.

My Respect

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9603899.0

NOMAD

Salaam

Salaam to All of you. sunI dont know if im trowing a stupid and irrational propose but.. ISNT Muhamed himself .(as quraish) being a ramification of a Beni israel ? being His tribe 1 of this 12 tribes mencioned? and if you see Quran mention Much Musa among Muhamed and place where Lot people lived, i dont know if same exacly places but somehow Adn and clan relatives(dont have sapereted verses to post but inshAllah ill be on that efoort soon) .

Anyway is funny that quran talks many and many verses the Words that These are the exemples of the cities, some major and some minor, but in facto probbly its all about citys towns village or just farm/fishing comunitys. If you type NAtion or country you will get into Biladi, alKuryaa, Madinahh,, wich yes they also have names like Misrim..

http//corpus.quran.com/search.jsp?q=city

Salaam and sorry for any errors in typing peace

unknownuser

Salams to everyone.

@Lena

Many of the questions you asked will be addressed, in one way or another, in the upcoming e-books.

I can however, give you a brief glimpse of a very important aspect of the history of Arabia that has been tragically overlooked The entire history of the Arabian peninsula, with its stories, legends, poetry, wars, and tribal migrations revolves around one central theme the struggle between urbanites and nomads. Many of the names that you mentioned do not indicate particular peoples or tribes, but rather they indicate a way of life. Let?s take, for example, Qahtan vs. Adnan.

The word Qahtan (sometimes rendered as Yoqtan) appears as Joktan in the Torah. This ?Joktan? is mentioned in the Old Testament as a descendant of Noah. According to Arabian lore, Qahtan was the legendary father of the Yemeni tribes of Hadramaut. Legends are NOT myths or fairy tales that need to be discarded or trashed. They are actually folk histories that have taken a symbolic meaning, wherein towns or cities take the names of individual figures. This is a kind of ?romanticizing? of historical accounts. Interestingly, the very word ?history? comes from the Latin ?istoria?, which is the equivalent of ?ustoora? in Arabic (&#1577. Rendering the word as ?legends? is simply for lack of a better term.

Now, the word ?Qahtan? comes from ?qaht? , which indicates a land that has dried up and withered. So what do the inhabitants of such lands do? Naturally, they will move to places where water and vegetation are found. The people who live in such places are called ?3adnani?, which comes from ?3adan? , indicating stable, and fruitful existence. You see the contrast?

By the same logic, we have Hebrews vs. Kanaanites. The word ?Hebrew? is a bastardization of the Arabic term ?3ibri?, derived from the root ?3abr?, (&#1585 which means simply to cross over from one place to another, as evidence of a nomadic lifestyle. The opposite of the verb ?3abr? is ?kana3? , which means to stick or remain rooted to a place, as evidence of a sedentary lifestyle. So you have the ?Hebrews? (nomad goat herders) vs ?Kan3anis? (agricultural sedentary residents who are adept at melting iron).

Why is Abraham described as a Hebrew? Because, according to ancient Yemeni legends, he left his drying and withering land in south-central Yemen and ?crossed over? towards the green oases of the mountainous Sarat regions - the fertile coastal strip along the Red Sea - where he lived among the Kan3anis. It?s very simple. The Banu Israel where a 100% ARAB tribe, just like Ad and Thamud. And what we call ?Torah? is nothing but a series of ancient Yemeni Psalms describing the comings and goings and struggles of this tribe, in their search for a better life and prosperity. The geography of the Torah has absolutely nothing to do with Palestine whatsoever. It?s all a big Orientalist lie. Many western scholars have known this truth, but they only whisper it behind closed doors, or in private conferences. The Israelites in fact spoke the ancient Sheba-Himyar dialect of South Arabia. This ?language? was revived by the Zionist movement during the late 19th Century, when they mixed it with Yiddish (rural German), and came out to the world with a ?holy language? to fit their racist agenda. It doesn?t even have an alphabet of its own! (They stole the Squared Aramaic letters). What they basically did was that they created a culture (land - history - language) out of nothing, perpetrating the biggest forgery the world has ever known. They hijacked and murdered the history of Palestine.

Going back to the Qahtani vs. Adnani matter, we see that it appears since as far back as the time of Cain and Abel. On one hand you have Abel (the goat herder) who makes an animal offering to God. On the other hand, you have Cain who makes a vegetable (plant) offering. The first is accepted and the second is rejected. So, Cain is overtaken with jealousy, and kills Abel. This is actually a symbolic legend of the struggle between the nomadic herders and the sedentary, agricultural people. See how far back it goes? Legends are in fact based on history, and the place names they mention (which also appear in poetry) are very real places.

The Quran speaks of ?Ahlul Madinati? (residents of the town) vs. ?Al A3rab? (the Bedouins). Again, mirroring this age-old struggle. Those who flocked around Muhammad (P) and believed in his message were of a mixed sort. This is why when the disbelievers heard Muhammad reciting the Quran, they quickly dismissed it as ?Asateer?ul Awwaleen? (Histories/legends of the ancients). In fact, the Quran is not denying that its verses are somewhat similar to those legends. Which ancients? The ancients of Arabia, of course. Can it be any simpler? The problem with Muslims is that they placed the events in a vacuum, and failed to realize that Bani Israel were among the inhabitants of Arabia all along. They did not migrate to Arabia from Palestine! It cannot be other than this way. The Quran tells us, in over a dozen places, that Muhammad and his people walked ON and AROUND the ruins of those who were destroyed before them (Ad, Thamud, Far3on). It tells them to explore those ruins and reflect on what happened. Yet the Muslims disregard the Quran, and place the prophets in Iraq, Egypt and Palestine. It is both tragic and comical at the same time.

Conclusion Hebrews and Kanaanites were not a particular people. The names are simply indicating a LIFESTYLE. There is not a single document in the entire history of the ancient world that names Palestine as ?Land of Kanaan?. I defy anyone to find it. This catastrophic lie has been passed onto the world, and the only sources for it are the Orientalist translations of the Torah. Look at all the maps of the ancient Romans and Greeks, from as early as 500 B.C. You will never see the word ?Kanaan? appear as describing the Levant. You will see ?Phoenicia? and ?Syria? and "Ugarit", but never ?Kanaan?. Why is that so, you wonder? Fact is Palestine was never known as Kanaan. Its people never called themselves that name. Someone labeled them so by force.

What happened to the Yemeni tribe of Israel?

They have scattered all over the world, and are no longer a single, close-knit community. However, their descendants are very much alive and well today.

Arabs were they an Adnani or Qatani tribe?

All ?Arabs? originated in Yemen. In fact, the so-called ?Semitic? race (although I hold very severe reservations against using this term, because it is in fact a Zionist invention of the 19th Century), originated in the South-West corner of Arabia.

Here is a quote from the Catholic New-Advent Encyclopedia

The tribes which inhabited these territories, and to some extent still inhabit them, show in language, traits, and character a sharply characterized individuality which separates them distinctly from other peoples. Their languages are closely related to one another, not being almost independent branches of language, like the great groups of Indo-Germanic languages, but rather dialects of a single linguistic group. Physically, also, the Semitic form it is found in Arabia. Here also the phonetics and partly also the grammatical structure of the Semitic language, are most purely, as the vocabulary is most completely, preserved. From these as well as from other circumstances the conclusion has been drawn that Arabia should be considered the original home of the Semitic peoples. All the racial peculiarities of the Semites are best explained from the character of a desert people. All Semites settled in civilized lands are, therefore, to be considered offshoots of the desert tribes, which were detached one after the other from the parent stem. This pressing forward towards civilized lands was a continuous movement, often in a slow development lasting through centuries but often also in mighty and sudden invasions, the last of which appears in that of the Arabs of Islam. The further question as to how the original ancestors of the Semites came to Arabia, is for the present beyond historical knowledge.

Please note what the last sentence says

The further question as to how the original ancestors of the Semites came to Arabia, is for the present beyond historical knowledge.

Here is what I believe (and I?m not imposing this belief on anyone) Arabia, not Ethiopia, is the cradle of the human race. It was there that humans (Adam and Co.) were forced out of the Garden of Aden, and eventually established the first urban settlement, which the Quran mentions as ?Ummul? Qura? (Mother of Towns). It is only a matter of time before archeologists confirm this. The problem is that Arabia has never been truly opened to any archeological digs, because the Saudi Wahhabis are against it (they bulldozed vast regions of 3asir in the 80?s and 90?s) and the Yemenis are too busy chewing Qat to give a damn about what lies underneath their feet.

Think about it You have a peninsula surrounded by water on three sides. Drastic climatic changes began with the end of last Ice Age, causing deserts to slowly creep in, as the waters and rivers dried up. Rivalry over green areas and water sources would cause the people, naturally, to migrate. So where could they go? The answer is of course, NORTH. This is why all the civilizations of Mesopotamia, The Levant, and the Nile valley, were originally migrants from the Arabian Peninsula. Even those archeologists who still hold the belief that Ethiopia is the cradle of humanity are 100% unanimous that Arabia was the first place our ancestors migrated to and settled. Hence, the shores of what is today called Yemen became the bridge via which our ancestors spread throughout the globe. Personally, I believe it?s the other way around. In either case, every evidence indicates that human civilization (urban centers), the raising of livestock, the carving of mountain homes, the domestication of the camel....it all began in South Arabia. And all the legends of the Garden of Aden, the Great Flood, Abel vs Cain, Hebrews and Kanaatites, Joktan vs. Adnan, etc... originated there, and were later carried on the wings of the ?Semitic? migrations, to other places.

Is there a relationship between the word Hud, Yahuda and Jew?

I think there is, but I haven?t quite put my finger on it. The old Yemeni dialects used certain letters as prefixes, which may have been the equivalent of the Arabic ?al-?. One of those letters is the which they stuck in the beginning of words.
Examples

(Thrb - Ythrb)
(Hud - Yahud)
(Karb - Yakrb)
(Boos - Yaboos / Jebusites).
(3rb - Y3rb)

So as you can see, there is a relationship, but it?s still foggy at this point.

Are the Jewish people an entirely different people than the Israelites that are from Yemen?

You must never mix the two concepts! They are JEWS yes, but they are not, nor do they have anything to do with the ancient Bani Israel. Think of ?Islam? and ?Quraish? are they synonymous? Imagine this

A Filipino embraces Islam, and claims that he is of the Quraish tribe, and therefore has the right to annex and occupy Arabia! Does this make sense to you? By the same logic, those JEWS who came to occupy Palestine in 1948 are EUROPEANS. They have no right in any Arab land, nor in Palestine. In fact, they need to pack their gear and go back to where they came from Russia, Lithuania, Poland Netherlands, Germany, etc? If you trace back the ancestry of those European Jews, you can be 100% sure that they originated in Khazaria, a kingdom that existed between the Black Sea and Caspian Sea, and were later pushed into Europe as a result of the Mongol wars. (Look up the book ?The Thirteenth Tribe?, and you will understand where the Ashkenazi Jews - who today compose nearly 85% of Jews worldwide - originally came from).

For over 100 years they have been insulting our intelligence by claiming that ?Judaism is a race!!!? How the Hell can it be a race, when you have Russian Jews, Morrocan Jews, Iraqi Jews, Ethiopian Jews, Yemeni Jews, even Peruvian Jews. What do all these people have in common? Nothing but their religious creed. Judaism is not a race. It is a RELIGION. No different than Christianity or Buddhism. Anyone who claims otherwise is not only defying logic, but defying the Quran, which clearly describes Judaism as a ?milla?, meaning a religious creed.
Here is what Allah says to Muhammad

{Neither the Jews nor the Nazarenes will be pleased with you until you follow their creed?}?

Peace and regards,

cleanfox5982

Salaam

.. ISNT Muhamed himself .(as quraish) being a ramification of a Beni israel ? being His tribe 1 of this 12 tribes mencioned? and if you see Quran mention Much Musa among Muhamed and place where Lot people lived, i dont know if same exacly places but somehow Adn and clan relatives(dont have sapereted verses to post but inshAllah ill be on that efoort soon) .

Salam ,

Muhammed is not from Children of Israel , Muhammed is from the progeny of Abrahim , the Quran distinguish clearly between the progeny of Abrahim and the progeny of Israel , saying that Yaaqub / Jacob is Israel was one of the big lie.

19-58

19-58 Those were the ones upon whom Allah bestowed favor from among the prophets of the progeny of Adam and of those We carried with Noah, and of the progeny of Abraham and Israel, and of those whom We guided and chose. When the verses of the Most Merciful were recited to them, they fell in prostration and weeping.

the progeny of Abrahim is different from the progeny of Israel , simply because Israel is not from the progeny of Nuh/Noah , see this

17-2/3

17-2 And We gave Moses the Scripture and made it a guidance for the Children of Israel that you not take other than Me as Disposer of affairs,
17-3 O progeny of those We carried with Noah. Indeed, he was a grateful servant.

Who's the one that the Al-Quran talk about here as being from progeny of those who was carried with Nuh/Noah , and who was a grateful servant ? Mussa/Moses or Israel ?

In my understanding the exsamination of the verse point to Isreal not Mussa/ Moses , simply because Mussa/ Moses is directly from the progeny of Nuh/Noah not from the ones that was carried with him in the ship , see this to see why the verse is not pointing to Mussa/ Moses but to Isreal

3-33

3-33 Indeed, Allah chose Adam and Noah and the family of Abraham and the family of 'Imran over the Al-Aalimen
3-34 A progeny some of them from others. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.

Mussa/ Moses is from the progeny of Al Imran , so simply he is from the progeny of Abrahim and then from the progeny of Nuh/ Noah , so he can not be the one mentioned in verse 17-3 as being from the progeny of who was carried with Nuh/Noah in the ship , because Mussa/Moses is directly from his progeny .

One more important comments is that the progeny of Abrahim and then the progeny of Al Imran used to live withing / among the children of Israel . Muhammed is from from the progeny of Abrahim and his used to live close to children of Isreal , but he is not from them , this is why the verse asked him to ask them by mentioning their name because its not his community

2-211 .

2-211 Ask the Children of Israel how many a sign of evidence We have given them. And whoever exchanges the favor of Allah after it has come to him - then indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.

Miggo

Anyway, since we mentioned the "guests" of Abraham, I was having a comical discussion with a Sunni about 10 days ago, and towards the end, I asked him about the following verses

{And his wife was standing, so she laughed when We gave her the good news of Ishac, and after Ishac, Yaqoub * She said "O my! Shall I give birth when I am an old woman, and here is my husband an old man? This is indeed a strange thing!" * They said "Do you wonder at the decree of Allah? The mercy of Allah and blessings are upon you O People of the Sanctuary. He is Praiseworthy, Glorious."}...

Q Who is the wife who was given tidings that she would bear Isaac?
A Sarah.
Q Where did Sarah live?
A In Palestine
Q Really? If she was in Palestine, then why did the malai'ka salute her and her husband as "People of the Sanctuary"? Which "Sanctuary" is being mentioned here?

His face turned purple, and he stormed out of the room, and I haven't seen or heard from him since then.

Salam Alaykum,

Honestly I am not very impressed with your argumentation there, and I guess you should be lucky the sunni didn't check your translation.

The word sanctuary is not in the text. The words translated to "People of the sanctuary" is "Ahlul Bayt". Ahl being the people. Bayt is an everyday arabic word, still used nowadays and it simple means "house" or "home" (or more generally "residence&quot. I just checked several translations, and the only one that translates it to sanctuary, is the one Layth has made. In his book "Natural Republic" he needs the word sanctuary to be there, to argument for his idea that "The Ahlul Bayt are the guardians of the Restricted Sanctuary of Pilgrimage".

As I think you know, Layths ideas about this (Yemen, Jews, Jerusalem) are quite opposite to yours. Its therefore interesting that you rely on a translation, that he has deliberately made so that it corresponds to his arguments. If you find a mistake between the "traditional" story and this translation of the Quran - the mistake might as well be in the translation as in the traditions.

Also. To a sunni (and even more a shia) the term "Ahlul Bayt" has a whole meaning of its own, and a sunni would therefore never start looking for a sanctuary if he heard that term.

In Collins English-Arabic Dictionary (the dictionary closest to me right now) "Ahl al-Bayt" is simply translated as "household".
If you translate "Ahlul Bayt" in the quoted verse as "household" then suddenly the "sanctuary" is nowhere to be seen (because it was never there).

unknownuser

@Miggo

As I think you know, Layths ideas about this (Yemen, Jews, Jerusalem) are quite opposite to yours. Its therefore interesting that you rely on a translation, that he has deliberately made so that it corresponds to his arguments.

OK. Let's go back to the Free-Minds translation but this time, leaving the term "Al Bayt" as it is, and irrespective of the other errors in their translation.

Take a close look at the following verses, and you tell me what the blue word means

1 -

{And We have made AL BAYT to be a model for the people and a security. And you shall take, from the station of Abraham, a place for making the contact. And We entrusted to Abraham and Ishmael "You shall purify My BAYT for those who visit, and those who are devoted, and the kneeling, the prostrating."}...

2-

{And as Abraham raised from AL BAYT its foundations, along with Ishmael "Our Lord accept this from us, You are the Hearer, the Knowledgeable."}...

3-

{Indeed, the stone and the rock outcropping are among the symbols of God. So whoever makes Pilgrimage to AL BAYT, or is merely passing through, commits no error should he traverse them. And whoever donates for goodness, then God is Thankful, Knowledgeable.}...

4-

{The first BAYT established for the people is the one in Bakk'a, blessed, and a guidance for the worlds. * In it are clear signs the station of Abraham. And whoever enters it will be secure. And God is owed from the people to make Pilgrimage to AL BAYT , whoever can make a path to it. And whoever rejects, then God has no need of the worlds.}...

5-

{O you who believe, do not violate the symbols of God, nor the restricted month, nor the donations, nor what is regulated, nor the safety made by AL BAYT AL HARAM; for they are seeking a bounty from their Lord and a blessing. And when it is permitted for you, then you may hunt. And let not the hatred of another people; because they had barred you from the Restricted Temple; make you aggress. And help each other in piety and righteousness, and do not help each other in sin and aggression. And be aware of God, for the retribution of God is severe.}...

6-

{God has made the Base to be AL BAYT AL HARAM; to enforce for the people, and for the restricted month, and for the donations, and for regulation; that is so you may know that God knows what is in the heavens and what is in earth, and that God is aware of all things.}...

7-

{And their contact prayer at AL BAYT was nothing but noise and aversion. Taste the retribution for what you have rejected.}....

8-

{"Our Lord, I have resided some from my progeny in a valley with no vegetation, near BAYTIKA AL HARAMI. My Lord, so that they may hold the contact prayer. So let the hearts of the people incline towards them and give provisions to them of the fruits that they may give thanks."}...

9-

{By the mount * And a recorded Book. * In parchment unrolled. * And AL BAYT AL MA3MOOR}...

10-

{This should be cherished by Quraysh. * The way they cherish the journey of the winter and summer. * So let them serve the Lord of this BAYT * The One who fed them from hunger, and protected them from fear.}...

I think it is clear what this word means, and I am sure that 99.99% of the readers will come to the same conclusion It is the BAYT of GOD.

Now, Layth's translation as "The Restricted Sanctuary" is a perfectly viable and acceptable rendering of the word. I have nothing against it. Our disagreement concerns the LOCATION of this Sanctuary. He believes it is in Jerusalem, and he is free to believe anything he wants. This argument is behind us now, and I will never agree with his position. To each his own.

Now, when we come to the verse in question, concerning the strange-looking guests of Abraham we see the exact same term being used to salute his wife, the mother of Isaac

{They said "Do you wonder at the decree of God? The mercy of God and blessings are upon you O people of AL BAYT. He is Praiseworthy, Glorious."}...

So which BAYT is it talking about?

Layth translates it correctly as "People of the Sanctuary"....So what? I don't see how that supports his Palestine argument. I'll tell you what it DOES support It supports that Abraham, Ismael, AND Isaac all lived in the same place.

As to where this place was....that's another story. I believe it is in South-West Arabia, and I have all the evidences I need to support this argument.

Also. To a sunni (and even more a shia) the term "Ahlul Bayt" has a whole meaning of its own, and a sunni would therefore never start looking for a sanctuary if he heard that term.

I don't care what the Sunnis or the Shias believe, because they DO NOT FOLLOW THE QURAN. It's as simple as that. To them, the Quran is simply eloquent poetry printed in fancy books of caligraphy, to be recited in funerals or over the dead.

When I come across the following instructions given - indirectly - to Muhammad's wives

{You shall be content in your homes, and do not show off like in the old days of ignorance. You shall hold the contact prayer, and contribute towards purification, and obey God and His messenger. God wishes to remove any affliction from you, O people of AL BAYT, and to purify you completely}...

I know exactly which BAYT it is mentioning, and nothing a Sunni or a Shiite can say will make me twist and corrupt Allah's words to make them fit with inherited beliefs or sectarian dogma.

Peace,
OUT.

Miggo

First I was merely telling you that your argument didnt make much sense towards that sunni - and you should be happy he didnt check your translation.
Therefore it makes little sense when you write this.

I don't care what the Sunnis or the Shias believe, because they DO NOT FOLLOW THE QURAN. It's as simple as that. To them, the Quran is simply eloquent poetry printed in fancy books of caligraphy, to be recited in funerals or over the dead.

I know you dont care. But I guess the sunni you were debating with do care. That is what I was saying. Had the sunni known, that you were asking him where the "sanctuary" in "Ahlul Bayt" were, he would not have given up the discussion so easily

@Miggo

OK. Let's go back to the Free-Minds translation but this time, leaving the term "Al Bayt" as it is, and irrespective of the other errors in their translation.

Take a close look at the following verses, and you tell me what the blue word means

.......

So which BAYT is it talking about?

Bayt means house or home in all of those instances, and not sanctuary a single time.

Now you are asking me WHICH house they are talking about...? Well that of course depends on the context. You quote a lot of verses. Well... the word Bayt is mentioned in other verses too. Does it always mean sanctuary?

Lets pretend to use that translation you like. How should Bayt be translated here (Hint in the translation you like it is translated as home, eventhough its the same word as is translated to sanctuary in other verses)

4.100 Whoever emigrates in the cause of God will find in the earth many spoils and a bounty. And whoever leaves his BAYT emigrating to God and His messenger, then is overcome by death; his recompense has fallen to God, and God is Forgiving, Merciful.

Now is this also the sanctuary of Ahlul Bayt??

8.5 As your Lord made you go out from your BAYT with the truth, but a party from among the believers disliked this.
(translated as home in the translation of your choice)

Look! Yusuf was being seduced in the sanctuary!!

12.25 And the woman, in whose BAYT he was staying, attempted to seduce him away from himself. And she closed the doors and said ?I have prepared myself for you.? He said ?I seek refuge with God, He is my Lord, He has made good my stay; the wicked do not succeed.?

17.93 ?Or that you have a luxurious BAYT , or that you can ascend into the heavens. And we will not believe in your ascension unless you bring for us a book that we can read.? Say ?Glory be to my Lord. Am I anything other than a human messenger!?
(again mysteriously translated to home...)

29.41 The example of those who take allies besides God is like the spider how it makes a BAYT; and the weakest BAYT is the BAYT of the spider, if only they knew.
(one of the bayth is in pluralis, but all are translated to the same singular word home)

And of course. In the verse you quote yourself about the Prophets wifes, the word BAYT is also mentioned in its pluralis form at the start of the verse. But in the start of the verse it means "homes" in the end it means "sanctuary"!!

But lets just stop the examples of this for now. Bayt means home or house. You are right, when God is talking about His Bayt then it is the Bayt of God!! Of course! But when He is talking about someone elses Bayt, then it is NOT the Bayt of God!

The thing this biased translation does is to mistranslate Bayt to sanctuary everytime the translator believes it is the house of God (why not just translate it to home or house as in all other verses? As you just proved, it can be read in the context that its the house of God. Why didnt the translator trust that the reader could see this for himself??).
So house is translated to sanctuary when it is Gods house AND when talking about "the people of the house"
To the unknowing reader this creates the impression that there is a connection between these 2. Oh, they both talk about a sanctuary. It must be the same sanctuary! Ohhh!
The translator of "A monotheist translation" got you to think what he wanted.
Tell me... Why not just translate it to house in all situations? And leave it to the reader to think if there is a connection between "Gods house" "her house", "his house", "your house", "the people of the house" etc. Instead of mistranslating 2 of these examples to sanctuary?? Creating the wrong impression, that the original Quran uses 2 different words!

But Im not done with the surprises. Because in the translation that you like to use, there is one instance where AHL BAYT is not translated to "People of the sanctuary" but as..... "Household".

We are at the time of Moses

28.12 And We forbade him from accepting all the nursing mothers. Then his sister said ?Shall I lead you to a household (AHL BAYT!) that can nurse him for you, and take good care of him??

Why why why why is it not a sanctuary here? Ohh, because it dont make sense of course!

Talk about a biased translation. When we talk about Ibrahims household we mistranslate to "People of the sanctuary", when we talk about Musas household we translate to... household
BECAUSE THATS WHAT IT MEANS!!

cleanfox5982

Now you are asking me WHICH house they are talking about...? Well that of course depends on the context. You quote a lot of verses. Well... the word Bayt is mentioned in other verses too. Does it always mean sanctuary?

Lets pretend to use that translation you like. How should Bayt be translated here (Hint in the translation you like it is translated as home, eventhough its the same word as is translated to sanctuary in other verses)

4.100 Whoever emigrates in the cause of God will find in the earth many spoils and a bounty. And whoever leaves his BAYT emigrating to God and His messenger, then is overcome by death; his recompense has fallen to God, and God is Forgiving, Merciful.

Now is this also the sanctuary of Ahlul Bayt??

8.5 As your Lord made you go out from your BAYT with the truth, but a party from among the believers disliked this.
(translated as home in the translation of your choice)

Look! Yusuf was being seduced in the sanctuary!!

12.25 And the woman, in whose BAYT he was staying, attempted to seduce him away from himself. And she closed the doors and said ?I have prepared myself for you.? He said ?I seek refuge with God, He is my Lord, He has made good my stay; the wicked do not succeed.?

17.93 ?Or that you have a luxurious BAYT , or that you can ascend into the heavens. And we will not believe in your ascension unless you bring for us a book that we can read.? Say ?Glory be to my Lord. Am I anything other than a human messenger!?
(again mysteriously translated to home...)

29.41 The example of those who take allies besides God is like the spider how it makes a BAYT; and the weakest BAYT is the BAYT of the spider, if only they knew.
(one of the bayth is in pluralis, but all are translated to the same singular word home)

And of course. In the verse you quote yourself about the Prophets wifes, the word BAYT is also mentioned in its pluralis form at the start of the verse. But in the start of the verse it means "homes" in the end it means "sanctuary"!!

But lets just stop the examples of this for now. Bayt means home or house. You are right, when God is talking about His Bayt then it is the Bayt of God!! Of course! But when He is talking about someone elses Bayt, then it is NOT the Bayt of God!

The thing this biased translation does is to mistranslate Bayt to sanctuary everytime the translator believes it is the house of God (why not just translate it to home or house as in all other verses? As you just proved, it can be read in the context that its the house of God. Why didnt the translator trust that the reader could see this for himself??).
So house is translated to sanctuary when it is Gods house AND when talking about "the people of the house"
To the unknowing reader this creates the impression that there is a connection between these 2. Oh, they both talk about a sanctuary. It must be the same sanctuary! Ohhh!
The translator of "A monotheist translation" got you to think what he wanted.
Tell me... Why not just translate it to house in all situations? And leave it to the reader to think if there is a connection between "Gods house" "her house", "his house", "your house", "the people of the house" etc. Instead of mistranslating 2 of these examples to sanctuary?? Creating the wrong impression, that the original Quran uses 2 different words!

But Im not done with the surprises. Because in the translation that you like to use, there is one instance where AHL BAYT is not translated to "People of the sanctuary" but as..... "Household".

We are at the time of Moses

28.12 And We forbade him from accepting all the nursing mothers. Then his sister said ?Shall I lead you to a household (AHL BAYT!) that can nurse him for you, and take good care of him??

Why why why why is it not a sanctuary here? Ohh, because it dont make sense of course!

Talk about a biased translation. When we talk about Ibrahims household we mistranslate to "People of the sanctuary", when we talk about Musas household we translate to... household
BECAUSE THATS WHAT IT MEANS!!

There is a big big difference between the word " Bayt " that you did bring many verses with it , and between the word "Al-Bayt" that member Pazuzu bring previously , what is the difference

As you can see the word " Bayt " in all the verses you mentioned is without the definite article "AL " , in the other hand the word "Al-Bayt" in all the verses member Pazuzu mentioned is with the definite article "AL ", is it a coincidence!!! ?? , surely not

the verses that are with the word "Al-Bayt" having the definite article "AL " in the beginning is simply pointing to a definite known place , this place is definite and known to all the community with a definite known purpose "Al-Bayt" is not an ordinary "Bayt " like the one you mentioned this is why the word pointing to it is having the definite article . "AL " in its beginning.

Salam.

Miggo

Salam Alaykum Alkitab,

As you can see the word " Bayt " in all the verses you mentioned is without the definite article "AL " , in the other hand the word "Al-Bayt" in all the verses member Pazuzu mentioned is with the definite article "AL ",

Not true. I wont go through every verse seeing which is written with an "al", and which is not (since it doesnt mean what you claim it mean anyway). But just to give one example the word bayt is written without "al" in the second occurence in 2.125 (quoted by Pazuzu), but still refers to God's house.

is it a coincidence!!! ?? , surely not

Of course the adding of "al" is not a coincidence. It brings the meaning of making a word definite. However this does not mean that everytime bayt is written in its definite form it refers to the SAME bayt.
Its just like putting "the" in front of a word in english. However we don't mean the SAME house everytime we talk about "the house" in english

Will give you some basic arabic teaching here
Bayt = A house
Al-Bayt = The house

So if we talk about

a house belonging to a man
a house belonging to a woman
a house belonging to God
= it will be Bayt and not al-Bayt

But if we talk about

the house belonging to a man
the house belonging to a woman
the house belonging to God
= it will be al-Bayt.

As you can see, whether or not the house belongs to God does not affect whether we write it with al or not. The grammatical context does.

However what you claim is that
bayt = house
al-bayt = sanctuary
= and thats just wrong! You are not even close.

It would be the same as claiming that the first "house" in these sentences is a normal house, while the second is refering to the house of God "Peter had a house. The house was huge". Thats basically what you just claimed.

Adding "al" to a word simply makes it definite, it does not change its meaning any other way.

Not sure I see the relevance of this very basic grammatical discussion. Ahlul Bayt still means household, and it doesnt mean that there is a sanctuary close to the people it refers to.

tlihawa

Salam,
I have another definition about bayt. I'm not good enough on arabic, so I just rely on the existing translations. I'm aware about the importance of arabic grammar, but sometimes, I need to do something more than that. I mean the understanding of the big picture.

Here is my understanding about bayt, and hajj as well.

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9603590.msg293981#msg293981

peace

Ashraf

However what you claim is that
bayt = house
al-bayt = sanctuary
= and thats just wrong! You are not even close.

It would be the same as claiming that the first "house" in these sentences is a normal house, while the second is refering to the house of God "Peter had a house. The house was huge". Thats basically what you just claimed.

Adding "al" to a word simply makes it definite, it does not change its meaning any other way.

Not sure I see the relevance of this very basic grammatical discussion. Ahlul Bayt still means household, and it doesnt mean that there is a sanctuary close to the people it refers to.

Dear Minggo,

Let me share something. I use to have a difficulty before while trying to understand al-bayt al-haram.

BAYT have multiple meaning IN CONTEXT such as a house, home, resident, residential area, sanctuary, organization, institution or settlement.

Other than a typical "house" meaning examples are

BAYT AL-MAL refer to office, organization or institution that distribute financial assistance.
BAYT AL-MUQADDAS or BAYT AL-LAHM (Bethlehem) refer to settlement or cities in Palestine.
BAYT AL-FAQIH refer to a famous market in Yemen.

IMHO, to what i understand, al-quran provide LINGUISTIC EVIDENCE about certain SOCIO CULTURAL LINGUISTIC usage that can pinpoint the LOCALITY of the place where the quran was originally revealed.

The usage of BAYT which refer to SANCTUARY or SETTLEMENT was famous in the region of SOUTH ARABIA. The same word usage may not be the culture in CENTRAL ARABIA (where Mekkah lies now).

You can check multitude of settlement areas refered to as BAYT in SOUTH ARABIA in GPS coordinate here
http//www.tageo.com/index-e-ym-v-08.htm

The usage of BAYT which refer to SETTLEMENT or SANCTUARY carry a unique SOCIO CULTURAL identity of certain community that provide us a "CLUE" where quran was originally revealed.

Another regional localities that use BAYT to refer as settlement, is PALESTINE/ISRAEL. However there is slight spelling change because of so called "hebrew" pronounciation. The spelling are either BEIT or BETH. (there are many places by name of "Bethlehem" in USA too)

You can go to wikipedia and search "BEIT ISRAEL" and the search result will display many settlement areas by name of BEIT. However the number of places with word BEIT in ISRAEL is not that extensive as the same usage in SOUTH ARABIA.

This is sort of linguistic evidence that provide us an understanding about where the word BEIT was originally from, thus it is one of the evidence taken by the historian over the migration path theory of SOUTH "semitic" to NORTHERN "semitic" flow.

BAYT AL HARAM is a civilized inhabitable settlement for mankind established by Prophet Ibrahim in SOUTH ARABIA, thus it is not a UN-INHABITABLE small cube without windows as promoted by pagan culture (which we cannot even call it a house).

Peace.

naveed

The information posted in this lengthy article did not consider the following and therefore is invalid.

The city of Makkah is mentioned by name in Quran in 4824 and the next Ayah 4825 mentions Masjid Al Haram. The first Ayah of the same Surah mentions which is pointing to the Prophet Muhammad (AS) conquering Makkah in the overall context of the Surah specially 4824-25.

4824
And it is He who withheld their hands from you and your hands from them within Makkah after He caused you to overcome them. And ever is Allah of what you do, Seeing.
4825
They are the ones who disbelieved and obstructed you from al-Masjid al-Haram while the offering was prevented from reaching its place of sacrifice. And if not for believing men and believing women whom you did not know - that you might trample them and there would befall you because of them dishonor without knowledge. That Allah might admit to His mercy whom He willed. If they had been apart , We would have punished those who disbelieved among them with painful punishment