The great secret of Islam - the hidden history of Islam revealed
-
For sure is bad that europeans want to teach arabs about their past (even if in History the most important is accuracy and not the origin of the historian) but is worst arabs want to teach europeans how to act in present and future, with the only hope of demographic numbers.
Europeans kill their population with contraceptives and abortions everyday.. Their population shrinks because of THEM not because of another people increasing in demographic numbers.
https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrO3TfJc9Qw - Do it for Denmark. No one has found out how to help Denmark's falling birth rate. Until now. Spies Travels announces a competition where you have to make a baby to win.
Wonders me why some arab-hadith follower people want to live in Europe instead in very rich arab countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Emirates, etc. Arabs are destroying arabs countries influenced by Christianity or by indoeuropean-non arab Iran and are promoting Sunni Empire in Middle East and the conquer of Europe.
Don't flatther yourself man. I'm pretty sure if the rich Arab countries like Saudi-Arabia, Qatar, Emirates and so on were fully democratic and secular many would choose them over Europe anyday. It is not only Arab-hadith followers that want to live in Europe, even non-hadith Europeans who enjoy jobs given to them in the Gulf. BTW It is one thing being rich, but having the human rights of a carpet is another. Nobody will live in the Gulf-countries regardless of their money. They are complete junk and only have oil, that's pretty much it. What is a country without human rights? Nothing. It can have a lot of money and it will still be nothing.
But now I have a question why did so many Europeans want to live in America, Palestine and Australia? Why not in the very 'rich' European countries?
-
Of course if you live to have fun and drink alcohol and party all life with no responsibilities there are no children made and those who still get made grow up to be monsters.
Be safe
Emanuel -
Muawiya (661-680) control to govern
Ultimately, reducing his opponents and their supporters one by one Muawiya managed to prevail by force and to be named Caliph in 661 by winning over the party of Ali and his two sons Hasan and Hussein (who will soon be liquidated as well). They will claim the side of the estate of their father, which by succession founded Shi'ism thereafter.
Muawiya transfers the capital of the caliphate from Medina to Damascus, the seat of his governorship, becoming the first Umayyad caliph, founder of this dynasty. He will focus in his kingdom on strengthening the Caliphates power to unite a badly developing ummah and thus to contain the fitna. He will put in place an effective centralized administration system, notably exploiting the skills of Christian and Jewish experts. It must be emphasized in this regard that the fitna had relatively little affected the indigenous peoples or if so mainly as "collateral damage."
Continuing like his Messianist predecessors making a mirage of promises while seeking to exploit them for personal profit, Muawiya in turn will try to justify his power by establishing a religious basis. As Uthman had tried to do before him, it is for him to stop the fitna and to unify the Ummah trying to give it more coherence and "efficiency" of religion in the service of his own authority. The destruction of "heterodox" texts " the reshuffling and selection of "approved " texts will continue throughout his reign, in order to form a single body which will be much more convenient than the many pages of collections. It will definitely be called Qur'an ("Qur'an" in Arabic), by analogy with the famous "Qur'an" which these same texts were referring. This new Qur'an describes God's will to establish the Arab caliph and as lords and masters in the name of the "religion of Abraham, "which proves a handy tool for a caliph seeking to justify his appeal. By force of circumstances, the analogy will become an alternative reality the "Qur'an" mentioned in the Qur'an, will be designated by Muawiya with an obscure meaning. Initially, the word "Qur'an" meant the lectionary of judeonazarenes ("qor'?no" or " qer'yana " in Syriac), that is to say the collections of texts from the Torah and their gospel they used for their liturgies, these Quran-lectionaries - to which their propaganda leaflets and preaching were referring to. The judeonazarenes would never have imagined that one would change the meaning of the word Qur'an, so that it designates a new holy book containing God's will. This manipulation is consecutively the source of serious logical problems how can a book in the process of manufacturing (since it was in the process of being revealed by God) refer to itself as a complete collection, and moreover by definition outside of itself? We will see later how Islamic theology tries to resolve this contradiction.
To support the building of religion, Muawiya will exploit certain providential events at the beginning of his reign, an earthquake has indeed collapsed in part the cube of Jerusalem which was built by judeonazarenes. Its restoration is considered unworthy of the devotion still made by the Arabs in their pilgrimages and their prostrations, despite the prominence of alternative shrines in Syria . Not to mention these very inconvenient Jews who revere it also in name of their "wrong" religion of Abraham, imagining it would have been the place of the sacrifice of Isaac. Yet all Arabs know well that Abraham had attempted to sacrifice his son Ishmael, their patriarch, not Isaac, the patriarch of the Jews. What could these Jews have possibly in common with the real "religion of Abraham", that of the true chosen people, the Arabs?
A blur even begins to surround the real purpose and usefulness of this temple, the reason of so many devotions. It's been nearly a generation ago that judeonazarenes were expulsed and the political turmoil, wars and rewriting of the history of the Arab conquest blurs the memories. The latter begs to answer many new questions. How to explain that the "religion of Abraham " of the Arabs, the "real" Abrahamic tradition would prevail over that of the Jews? How to justify that Arabs are the "real" sons of Abraham, instructed by God to rule the world? And if so, how to justify the anteriority of revelation to Arabs compared to the revelation to the Jews, even to all religions? This would require that somewhere, preferably in Arab land not touched by outside influence, an authentic sanctuary of Abraham pre-existed, before the time of the temple of Jerusalem. This is what Muawiya will claim. He had just discovered this famous sanctuary 400 kilometers south of Medina, ideally located in a desert place. That would be the ancient city of Mecca.
More seriously, we must understand that Muawiya, his scribes and his advisers were asked the same questions that we just raised. And many others have put similar questions to them, whether from their Arab opponents or in Jewish and Christian circles. Thus they have come to the need to create ex nihilo an Arab shrine dedicated to Abraham. And to decree absolute precedence, since it would be Abraham himself who would have built it - if not Adam, the first man. Abraham would have even lived there. They then impose this on the Arabs as a place of worship and pilgrimage, instead of Jerusalem and the Syrian sites. This desert place, devoid of any presence of history, is selected from the Hejaz in Arab land, and therefore it meets all the criteria to answer these difficult questions. Why specifically did he choose this place? The discussion is still open, failing to be able to conduct archaeological research which the current Saudi leadership bans (but allowed elsewhere, despite findings that contradict the Muslim discourse). We know that there was an Arab presence nearby the oasis Mina is close, and the ancient city of Taif is not further than sixty kilometers of the chosen site, which is located at the same distance from the shores of the Red Sea . Anyway, Muawiya built a temple there, a shrine of Abraham and installs a black stone there, which was already venerated before . He orders this to be the direction of prayer in the entire umma, the qibla. It is not established that the name Mecca was given to it at that time as it was to be referred to as "Masjid Ibrahim" (place of Abrahams prostration). This happens in the year 670 . Muawiya thinks he achieved a master stroke in this long job of erasing followed by recreating memories, even the new sanctuary just accepted by his contemporaries. And in the medium term, it will become a key ingredient in the long process leading to the formation of Islam, yet it was from the outset a source of many disputes. Disputes which will turn into clashes and terrible wars in the umma, as it is true that any new memories and manipulation of religion becomes inevitably subject to "fitna".
http//www.reformation.org/en-black-stone.jpg
Image black stone at Mecca
Beyond that challenge, the creation of this sanctuary, like any lie, has structural flaws which help in search of the truth, even fourteen centuries later first of all, choosing a desert, arid land, without vegetation for livestock without arable land, without game, prevents reasonably to consider that a city could be founded and remained there from time immemorial. And above all, the site chosen for the construction of this sanctuary is actually bowl-shaped, surrounded by hills and mountains. Also, when heavy rains occur, water is proving very problematic. And in case of heavy rains, as it happens from time to time, the site is then suddenly flooded or destroyed by torrents of water and mud. The chronicles of the early centuries of Islam are making notice of flooding in 699, 703, 738, 800, 817, 823, 840, 855, 867, 876 and 892. In 960, a caravan of pilgrims from Egypt was even swallowed by these streams while it was approaching it! We saw earlier how the Kaaba was nearly destroyed by these disasters, in 1620 (see Note 9). She had to be partly rebuilt and reinforced by Sultan Murad. And until recently, before the Saudis ended up to more or less effectively treat the problem, the cube was still regularly flooded. The rest of the city of Mecca, which is built around since, also continues to be flooded from time to time.
It therefore seems unimaginable that such a shrine could well survive the centuries from Abraham under these conditions. An even more thriving commercial city is said to have developed. Moreover, we find until the end of the 7th century no mention of this city, its ancient sanctuary, its trade, its pilgrimages which would be associated with it . It is not reported by any writer, no geographer, no testimony . It is not even mentioned in the famous Medina Charter , the oldest document claimed by Islam. And again, it is located away from all the caravan routes of the time, which is extensively documented. The opposite of for example Yathrib, reported by historians, where we found archaeological remains which would be hard to dig up around the Kaaba, even more difficult as the Saudis have disturbed the subsoil today during titanic works. The graffiti, called "Islamic" of the 7th century found in Saudi Arabia does not mention that city nor its sanctuary. Besides, contemporary critics of early Islam did not shy away from highlighting these absurdities John of Damascus pointing out precisely that it was impossible to find near Mecca sufficient wood required for the sacrifice of Abraham. He might as well have added that Abraham could never have found any means of support allowing it to settle in the desert environment of Mecca to build the Kaaba. The Qur'an itself describes the inhabitants of Mecca, the supposed "polytheists" which were adressed by the sermons of Muhammad , as farmers and fishermen!
They grow wheat, dates, olives, grapes, pomegranates. They lead to pasture their herds of goats, sheep, cows and camels. They sail at sea on their sail boats, and eat freshly caught fish and shellfish. How can one imagine the possibility of such abundance in the middle of the desert and mountainous region of Mecca?http//i.imgur.com/EXt7vcU.jpg
Image some examples of floodings at MeccaBut back to Muawiya, who was certainly not worrying about such details. The transfer to the Hejaz of the cubic sacred form, named "Kaaba "and its attribution to Abraham allowing to justify the Arabism of the "Religion of Abraham", its anteriority and his pre-eminence. But they cant answer themselves the whole series of questions that are induced by these chains of manipulations. Having removed the judeonazarene source of religion, the Arabs find themselves at a loss to explain how they came to know so well the will of God which favours them so much. Where does this new Qur'an and this new doctrine come from? The caliph was the first to be targeted by these questions since he wanted to take religion as legitimacy of his power. So naturally within the circles of the protesters of the Caliphates authority these questions will resonate in nature and answers will have to be found to justify this contestation. Indeed, occupied by the offensive against the Byzantines which he started a campaign against in 674 (going as far as to besiege Byzantium), Muawiyah could not contain the rise of various oppositions to his power. The ummah is still and always burdened by the seeds of civil war. At his death in 680, Muawiya, absolute monarch and founder of his dynasty, leaves a very bad inheritance to his son Yazid. Yet the structures of the Caliphate never seemed so strong, while the transvestism of memories and religion, the constitution of his doctrine in the service of power seems to bring him the legitimacy required for absolutism. But deep in its religious heart, the caliphate is undermined by fitna. It will explode in a new civil war with the enthronement of Yazid. This will be the second fitna in Muslim traditions!
661, according to the Syriac chroniclers.
Here is how the Gallic bishop Arculf in his pilgrimage to Jerusalem in 670, described the "restored" building under Muawiya "This famous location where once stood the beautifully constructed Temple, Saracens now attend a quadrangular house of prayer they crudely built on ruins. It is made of upright planks and large beams. They say this house can accommodate 3,000 people at a time". Moreover, a hebrew fragment of the Jewish-Arab apocalypse quoted by Israel Levi in 1914, mentions that Muawiya has "restored the walls of the Temple "; the author (Jewish) assimilates its construction, on the site of the temple of Herod, the restoration of this building.
This suggests that the observed changes in the orientation of mosques built then - cf. note 81.
Arabs from Syria and with them other nomadic populations, for centuries vowed worship to these meteorite stones. It is reported that one of these black stones was transported from Emesa (Homs) to Rome in 219 by emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, born in Syria, who rendered to it an "obscene cult " (according to the commentators, named Elagabalus)
As revealed by the change of direction of the qibla in the Masjid / Mosques, more or less from that time.
Abraham would have lived between about -1900 and -1600 BC according to Muslim traditions.
Mecca is not located on the road of incense, and even less at the crossroads of major trade routes. Islamic traditions mention that the Meccan trade was the scent of Yemen, leather, camels, and perhaps donkeys, clarified butter and Hejaz cheese Hejaz. Who bought them just to have left no witness? The perfume and leather industry was very well developed in Byzantium, and food and livestock were abundant in Syria. Furthermore, the Meccans are claimed by these same traditions to not have traded with pilgrims.
Some Muslims today are desperately trying to flaunt these testimonies despite everything, obeying the principle of logic that built a backwards Islam. They want to see the deformation of the name of Bakkah Petra, Jordan or that of "Maccoraba" cited by Ptolemy - that is, the saying "portus Mochorbae" Pliny (thus a port that can not be Mecca, located 80 m from the coast) .Patricia Crone refuted this in her book "Meccan trade and the Rise of Islam"
Statement by AL de Pr?mare Mohammed, author of the charter between emigrants and people of Yahtrib says nothing about Mecca.
In his Treaty of Heresies, 746; mentions Isaac, not Ishmael.
We will see later what meaning to give to the "polytheism" spoken of in the Muslim discourse.
This was particularly demonstrated by Patricia Crone in her article "How did the Quranic Pagans make a living? " Over a meticulous study of Koranic verses. Her work has never been refuted.
A name that is reminiscent of the "Abu Kaaba" high traditional place of the Arabs of Syria (see map Dussaud, as linked in a previous post) -
Peace .
I have a couple of questions since quoteMuawiya transfers the capital of the caliphate from Medina to Damascus, the seat of his governorship, becoming the first Umayyad caliph, founder of this dynasty.
1- Why not choose a sanctuary in Iraq ? Surely if one could find Mecca as a sanctuary, one could easily find a similar place in Iraq near the new capital?
2- Where in Qoran is?
Qur'an itself describes the inhabitants of Mecca, the supposed "polytheists" which were adressed by the sermons of Muhammad , as farmers and fishermen!
Just wondering.
GOD bless.
Peace. -
Peace .
I have a couple of questions since quoteMuawiya transfers the capital of the caliphate from Medina to Damascus, the seat of his governorship, becoming the first Umayyad caliph, founder of this dynasty.
1- Why not choose a sanctuary in Iraq ? Surely if one could find Mecca as a sanctuary, one could easily find a similar place in Iraq near the new capital?
Damascus is in Syria, not in Iraq. Most likely Mecca was chosen because of the criteria mentioned being an undisputed Arab site, untouched by other traditions. The point was to use this Arab site as propaganda for an Arab "religion of Abraham". Using a site in Syria would not fit those criteria, since the sanctuaries in Syria were also known to the judeonazarenes.
2- Where in Qoran is?
Qur'an itself describes the inhabitants of Mecca, the supposed "polytheists" which were adressed by the sermons of Muhammad , as farmers and fishermen!
There are many references in Quran of this some can be derived from the verses concerning the dietary habits shellfish, grapes, pomegranates. Next to this the many references to ships and metaphors linked to agriculture and fishing.
-
How can one explain the continuous flow of ZamZam water well beneath makkah? Is it a man made? if yes must there be a source of water? If not, then did muwaya just stumble upon this abundance of water?
The mention of Zamzam must have been recorded in history pre -islam, no?
Moreover with your definition, the ritual of hajj, tawaf and saee mentioned in Quran, was it meant for Jerusalem?
-
Europe have suffered a strong dechristianization since Neopagan Reinassance until nowadays, going through French Revolution, etc.
Now Europe confront 1.- cultural marxism-feminism-multiculturalism, 2.- neopagan-nationalism (different of patriotism)- cult of vital energy, 3.- usury, 4.- sect called islam and islamization.
All of them are social engineering made by the rabid enemies of the Word of God.
When Europe left the Word of God we are seeing like a grotesque kermesse of followers of social engineering systems all them created in order to separate humanity from God, our Father. Some of them come from inside and another come from outside but all them are from the Darkness. All them have in common that they hate and lie ad infinitum and prefer arogance, rules and power instead humbleness, conscience and love.
May the Word of God will remain between the brave people that is attached to it in Egypt, Syria and Middle East.
It's time for all the people who want to preserve the Link between humanity and its Father to shut up, be humble and ready to act.
-
The muslim tradition claims the zam zam well is as old as Abraham and Hagar. There is however no historical source backing this up.
The judeo-christian hajj (hag in Hebrew) was to Jerusalem. There is no record of pilgrimage towards Mecca before the time Muawiya. It's not known if the zam zam well was dug by Muawiya or by who whatsoever.
-
Buddy, not sure I follow your logic. You are sure of other things to cite from history yet you did not find how the well was created?
Are we to believe only your sources all of a sudden? If this was so black and white as you have put it, then sure many historians from both sides would have mentioned these facts, esp the ones the makkah did not exist?
Even the shia did not debate it while you claimed they branched out as a result of muwaiya starting wars against the two sons. Definitely shia sect must have known there was no makkah and muwaiya made it up, yet they do not follow your logic?I am only being critical to get my answers and no way disrespectful to your theses.
cheers
The muslim tradition claims the zam zam well is as old as Abraham and Hagar. There is however no historical source backing this up.
The judeo-christian hajj (hag in Hebrew) was to Jerusalem. There is no record of pilgrimage towards Mecca before the time Muawiya. It's not known if the zam zam well was dug by Muawiya or by who whatsoever.
-
The Second Civil War (680-685) the explosion of the primo-Islam
It is certainly not easy to succeed an absolute monarch father, much less in the conditions in which Yazid came to power. He is indeed the first caliph to draw his legitimacy from a dynastic succession - his predecessors were all imposed by their rank, their determination, even by coup. Inevitably, his authority is questioned by many factions, claiming to belong to a multitude of currents Qorechite supporters of their own clans, not recognizing Yazid (yet Qorechite themselves), families and supporters of former leaders and caliphs who were assassinated, especially the followers of Ali and his son Hussein (who will also be murdered during the fitna), supporters of Ali being turned against him (the Kharijites), supporters of Ali opposed his son Hussein, supporters of the great governors
in the Empires territories, dissatisfied with the Umayyad tyranny, mercenaries of the regime, warlords seceding as well as an alternative ... a self-proclaimed caliph. An imbroglio even more complex than the political motivations which feed the religious nature of the objections, justifying them in turn. And as we now know that they are consubstantial with the "religion of Abraham" since it failed to return the Messiah in Jerusalem, as we know that they are growing and multiplying with every succession it has suffered since then, we understand a little better the recurrent phenomenon of civil war, a phenomenon that seems to have no end.In particular, the caliph will be challenged by his being opposed to the figure of the former leader who galvanized the heroes of the Hegira, of which some still remembered his role in preaching the "religion of Abraham". The ringleader, nicknamed Muhammad (Muhammad), did however bring nothing new, but only transmitted the judeonazarene doctrine. But nearly seventy years had passed since the first conquest of Jerusalem (614), about fifty since his death. The relative oblivion into which he fell and especially erasing from it the jud?onazarene masters allowed teachers to embellish the accounts which recalled his memory . Since he preached, why not believe and make believe he was a God sent a "Rasul" ? So here comes the invention of prophethood which subsequently allowed the Qur'anic text to be understood as a new revelation. Historically, Muhammad's preaching in contrary never contained any of that. He was only indirectly linked to memory aid texts in Arabic which reproduced the various preachings of the judeo-nazarenes, and from which developed then painstakingly the Koranic collection (one can see in these sheets originally the work by the person who the Islamic tradition called Waraqa). About the years 680 and appear for the first time mentions of Muhammad, called "Rasul", among the supporters of Ali and his son who oppose frontally the power of the Caliph. It is well worth having with you the authority of a messenger of God when challenging one who claims to rule on behalf of God. And it seems even more convenient to associate the memory of Ali with Muhammad, his cousin, his stepfather, his former commander and comrade, the late Ali is no longer there to testify, 20 years after his assassination. Didn't he himself have, in the days of his caliphate, to better establish his authority and to silence his opponents, Muawiya in mind! These considerations do not stop the partisans of Ali, nor the other opponents of the Caliph. They find, by exploiting the authority they decide to grant to the "Rasul", a very effective way to reject the authority of the caliph (Yazid), of the hated Umayyad lineage, their eternal nemesis. In response, obviously, the Caliphate will affirm the superiority of its authority over that of the "Rasul" . The emergence of an Arab prophecy adds to more discord within the umma. This prophecy is, as we can clearly see, only one of the results of the contradictions inherent to religious manipulation, which ferment into the political protest against the caliph. Of the boiling down of the second fitna, we must remember first the rise of Abd Allah Ibn al-Zubayr , more or less linked to Ali and Hussein, who immediately refused the authority of Yazid, and established his own caliphate in the "Sanctuary of Abraham" (Mecca). He is the first to avail himself of Muhammad. He attacks the authority of the caliph by that of the messenger of God - authority he grants himself, by presenting himself as a new "blessed" or "very rigtheous", "sent from God" by associating the phrase "Muhammad Rasul Allah "with his image on the coins he lets produce.
http//i.imgur.com/yP7Bq9v.png
Image Coins bear the profile of Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr (685/686)
The third piece, presented by Tom Holland in his documentary "Islam, the Untold Story"
(BBC ? Tom Holland). Y is marked with "mhmdrswlllh" (Muhammad messenger of God)These coins (see image) are the first "Islamic" evidence in history to mention Muhammad, dated about 685 or 686 (the term Islam is not yet being used to name the "religion of Abraham". Ibn al-Zubayr succeeds to dominate all the Hejaz up to Yemen, Iraq, Egypt and even manages to ensure certain positions in Syria. Note that the shrine built by Abraham in Mecca by Muawiya was destroyed by fire in 683 (a hazard of civil war?), and Zubayr, owner of the place, had it rebuilt in a curious form of semicircle , further proof if any were needed considering the subject of the "Ibrahim masjid" of that time.
Yazid, meanwhile, had a strong short reign without territorial expansion (rather we watched some reflux) due to the torments of civil war, and particularly the struggle facing Ibn al-Zubayr. It is reported his death was in 683 caused by a riding accident at the end of a battle against the party of Ibn al-Zubayr. What follows is a period of more trouble, on which historical truth is not certain. Muslim traditions that relate these events are very difficult to unravel as they have embellished the truth (still using the same logic of hindsight justification). The son of Yazid, Muawiya II, becomes caliph, but had given up very quickly, after four months, by refusing to oppose al-Zubayr Ibn and reluctance to shed blood in fratricidal struggles. He died shortly by natural cause . According to Muslim tradition, Marwan, his cousin, also cousin of Uthman, succeeded him, causing a change of clan in the Umayyad dynasty's reign in which he became the fourth caliph (so still Qorechite). He also died shortly after his coronation, in unclear circumstances (murdered by his wife?). The little we have of Muslim sources about these two caliphs with rather enigmatic realms is a very revealing story of a work of rewriting which is continued in the following centuries by Muslim "historians". Their first goal was to try to give the beginnings of Islam an appearance less terrible than it was, among other masking the real sources of fitna (they always reverse this logic). In general of Marwan we remember mainly the son who succeeded him in 685, the new Caliph of Damascus Abd al-Malik. He indeed will leave a strong imprint in Muslim history as a key figure in the unification of the Arab empire and the construction of the future "Islam".
This is the base material that will form the hadiths.
More than just a prophet ("nabyi" in Arabic), a "Rasul" is sent by God as a "messenger" or "apostle" to accomplish a mission (to a book). The "religion of Abraham" preached by judeonazarenes only knew of two Moses and Jesus.
644 The controversy between the Jacobite Patriarch of Syria John 1st and the Emir Said ibn Amir, governor of Homs and Muhammad's companion, not yet mention any prophet or prophecy (or Qur'an, for that matter). The patriarch Sophronius of Jerusalem does not speak of it in his chronicles that are yet very detailed. The graffiti called Islamic in Saudi Arabia do not mention it before 687re.
This is evidenced in a letter of Hajjaj, great military leader of the future Caliph Abd al-Malik, when he will be the governor of Iran.
According to some Muslim traditions, Zubayr was a young companion of the Prophet, subsequently instructed by the Caliph Uthman of the compilation and dissemination of the Quran (with Zayd). Was he also an Arab judeonazarene preacher? It could be possible, although these traditions have him born during the beginning of the Hegira.
According to Mr. Gaudefroy-Demombynes, who studied this reconstruction achieved by using Syrian and Persian works. It was at this moment that the mosaics were torn from the Sana'a cathedral and were incorporated into the pavement of the sanctuary, and that its columns were taken to be used for the bulding of the "masjid" surrounding it.
This is very questionable version of the history of the successors of Yazid proposed by columnist and "historian" Muslim Tabari (rather a man who proved to be more a manipulative hagiographer than a historian). He realized his writings in the 10th century, over 200 years after the fact. Sunni and Shia traditions have different versions of the end of the caliphate of Muawiya II -
Buddy, not sure I follow your logic. You are sure of other things to cite from history yet you did not find how the well was created?
Are we to believe only your sources all of a sudden? If this was so black and white as you have put it, then sure many historians from both sides would have mentioned these facts, esp the ones the makkah did not exist?
Even the shia did not debate it while you claimed they branched out as a result of muwaiya starting wars against the two sons. Definitely shia sect must have known there was no makkah and muwaiya made it up, yet they do not follow your logic?I am only being critical to get my answers and no way disrespectful to your theses.
cheers
There is no historical document about Mecca whatsoever of that time. So no one really knows who dug the well. Mecca is not mentioned in any historical document, not even in the charter of Medina. Add to this the floodings, hard conditions to sustain life there, it becomes very unlikely to assume Mecca has a tradition of sanctuary going back not only to that time but a millenium before it.
There was no such thing as a shia sect at that time yet. Neither was there an Islam yet. These are the very first stages that will lead to the Islam we know today. Please wait for the entire document to be translated. As it may clear up some of the questions you have right now.
-
What I meant was that the shia sect has foundations where muawia played a significant role and yet shia sect later developed, did not notice the greatest act of the same person to gave birth to a new city makkah and to redirect hajj and all of the rituals.. this is something strange on shia sect scholars to have missed out.
Flooding of kaba is not a big deal, I have been to makkah several times and the whole of makka was never in the flooded zone. Besides it is not a sign to say that a certain site can not hold any religious value if it has natural issues. Tibet is one example.
of course I will wait and read but as you are using the logic to justify " no proof what so ever etc" I am also entitled to use the same logic to ask for clarifications.
As per the folks I converse with , the belief is that Kaba was the only Kibla from day one, long before Islam, there was no changing of kaba to that from Jerusalem and that word masjid aqsa used in quran actually meant prophets migration from makkah to madina as aqsa means far off place.
Going by your logic, is there substantial historical proof for men like moses and jesus to ever existed in history, that the Egypt we know of today was actually the place where the event took place. Unless there were cctv or certified publications from oxford press or perhaps mainframe computers, maybe. Else what you said will always be subject to questions.
Anyway , keep posting but I am afraid I need citations not just a story, citations from both sources not just the ones you claim.cheers
There is no historical document about Mecca whatsoever of that time. So no one really knows who dug the well. Mecca is not mentioned in any historical document, not even in the charter of Medina. Add to this the floodings, hard conditions to sustain life there, it becomes very unlikely to assume Mecca has a tradition of sanctuary going back not only to that time but a millenium before it.
There was no such thing as a shia sect at that time yet. Neither was there an Islam yet. These are the very first stages that will lead to the Islam we know today. Please wait for the entire document to be translated. As it may clear up some of the questions you have right now.
-
Flooding of kaba is not a big deal, I have been to makkah several times and the whole of makka was never in the flooded zone.
Have a look at the pictures. The whole of makka was flooded on a regular basis before the Saudis took some measure (huge tanks and reservoir to absorb the floods). And even with those measure the masjid al haram gets almost flooded from time to time
You can see it here with this video from 2011 https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=L38-VLgDh80
Or just google "makka flood" and lok for the picturesPeace.
Olaf
-
What I meant was that the shia sect has foundations where muawia played a significant role and yet shia sect later developed, did not notice the greatest act of the same person to gave birth to a new city makkah and to redirect hajj and all of the rituals.. this is something strange on shia sect scholars to have missed out.
The protest at that time came from many different currents among which one that indeed later gives life to the shia sect. The second fitna and civil war are clear indicators this creation of an Arab sanctuary ex nihilo encountered a lot of protest from many different sides (even among Qorechites). The later established shia sect however, as the translation will point out, is an Arab movement. Muawiya should not be confused with what later will be the Arab shia sect. The conflicts discussed in the chapter dealing with Muawiya predate the sunni-shia conflict which becomes only relevant with the establishment of the current format of Islam (starting in the 8th century, which will be covered in the next parts of the translation).
Flooding of kaba is not a big deal, I have been to makkah several times and the whole of makka was never in the flooded zone. Besides it is not a sign to say that a certain site can not hold any religious value if it has natural issues. Tibet is one example.
It does raise some serious questions however on a tradition that claims it has been a place of worship for millennia. It also is incompatible with the fruits etc described in Quran; making it even less likely to have a history pre-Muawiya (not on a trade route, arid environment, not mentioned in contemporary documents not even the Medina charter, not mentioned on "Islamic" graffiti, not used on coins, etc etc).
of course I will wait and read but as you are using the logic to justify " no proof what so ever etc" I am also entitled to use the same logic to ask for clarifications.
As per the folks I converse with , the belief is that Kaba was the only Kibla from day one, long before Islam, there was no changing of kaba to that from Jerusalem and that word masjid aqsa used in quran actually meant prophets migration from makkah to madina as aqsa means far off place.The archaeology on the field contradicts what you believe. The excavations of old mosques all show distinct qibla's towards Jerusalem/Syria, which have been changed later towards Mecca.
Going by your logic, is there substantial historical proof for men like moses and jesus to ever existed in history, that the Egypt we know of today was actually the place where the event took place. Unless there were cctv or certified publications from oxford press or perhaps mainframe computers, maybe. Else what you said will always be subject to questions.
Anyway , keep posting but I am afraid I need citations not just a story, citations from both sources not just the ones you claim.There are many citations in the essay, see eg "Meccan trade and the Rise of Islam" by Patricia Crone. The author can hardly be accused of not using source references. In my translation of the work, the footnotes take up almost 50% of the work!
-
Thanks to runninglikezebras for taking time to translate the writing. Unfortunately, the original writer has merely written a soap opera capable of competing against Dallas! Reason It has way too many loopholes.
First of all, "according to tradition" does not reinforce history, but legends.
To this end, the judeonazarene propagandists, Syro-Aramaic speaking Jews, many of whom know the liturgical Hebrew, explained their texts to the Arabs. Moreover, they formed the Arab preachers, translated their texts in Arabic and taught them. For this, they created for them little textbooks, anthologies of the main texts of their Torah, their Gospel, their customs, their laws, their rites of purity, their circumcision ... It was indeed the memory aid at a time when education was essentially managed and transmitted by heart the main memory aids consisted of translations into Arabic language used by the judeonazarenes themselves. A lectionary is a liturgical book that presents readings and comments from sacred texts, as always Christian. The judeonazarene lectionary therefore presented excerpts from the Bible, Old and New Testament - for as much the judeonazarenes accept it - in function of the calendar (Saturday, Sunday, holidays). In Syro-Aramaic Christians called this lectionary "qor'?no" (which translates in Arabic as "Qur'an", that is to say, "Koran".
Since he preached, why not believe and make believe he was a God sent a "Rasul" ? So here comes the invention of prophethood which subsequently allowed the Qur'anic text to be understood as a new revelation. Historically, Muhammad's preaching in contrary never contained any of that. He was only indirectly linked to memory aid texts in Arabic which reproduced the various preachings of the judeo-nazarenes, and from which developed then painstakingly the Koranic collection
A new revelation that rhymes, can be memorized entirely by a 3 year old, finishes talking about 71 people exactly in 71 words and has built in firewall?
Too bad that they didn?t keep the preaching ?we are god?s chosen people? in that book. It would have made things far easier in their conquest missions. Its also a great foolish thing to not add a verse ?Obey Allah, messenger and rulers?.They undermine the ideological unity and promote differences. They disrupt hierarchies and compromise the fragile agreement of the ummah considering the project of conquest of Jerusalem. Naturally, leaders, generals, emirs had to rebel, one could say thanks to the military successes which enabled them to acquire great power - some are now governors of the territories they conquered, out of reach of authority altogether questionable Arab generalissimo. Without judeonazarenes, where would it take them?
The rejection of the entire judeonazarene community, the abandonment of the temple, the intrusive collection of texts, rewriting them to root out the judeonazarene facts, in short, the damage to the "religion of Abraham" that this operation represents causes a real outrage in face of the propaganda which took decades to establish itself. Contempt of the very meaning of the fighting, the epic of the conquest of Jerusalem. Violating memories and even an affront to the will of God as the "religion of Abraham". There is therefore naturally lack of understanding, resistance, opposition. This reasoning allowed to deny the authority of Omar, which was accused of being a Munafiq, a traitor to the faith ... These are the roots and the beginning of the incessant fitna, the civil war that bloodied the Ummah for centuries until today. It is therefore not surprising that Omar is promptly murdered in 644, only four years after the "non-event" of Jerusalem. Uthman, military leader from the core of Qorechite Emigrants and great leader of the conquest, then wins against Ali, another emigrated one, as the new master of Medina. Before the protest, while the ummah gets stuck in the quagmire of religious manipulation and the Civil War, he took control over religious power. He continues the strategy of clearing the judeonazarenes as the source of the religion of the Arab conquerors, and the resulting ostracism from the judeonazarene community in Syria. But above all, he undertook the retaking of control of politics and ideology of the ummah.
Just what I expected. Yeah, lets keep playing the conquest game even though the temperature in our location is usually 120, even though we hardly find cool water, even though our population never seems to increase, even though we hardly have a good economy, even though it can be extremely difficult to set up camp in desert without being seen from distance by our enemies, even though we might not have food after a few days of our journey to target land because there is no supermarket and vegetable plants in our sandy location, even though while walking we can?t prevent hot sand from making us suffer in the legs, even though horses can become dehydrated, even though their only alternative for us is the slow camel, even though our sun is hot enough to kill us, even though we are already divided....
Once again, I appreciate your hard work runninglikezebras.
As for the writer, it is extremely clear that he knows nothing about the geography, living standard and past economy of Middle East. But again, history has a habit of violating even laws of physics. He didn't even take time to study what is in the Quran for which his narrative about it is snake oil. This book does not claim to be new revelation.
I am done with this thread. I thought I would find something realistic. But that didn't happen.
peace
-
Buddy I knew those pic since so long. However my point is that flooding is a different issue and can not be taken as an excuse or reason not to have makkah exists during the prophet's time.
Cheers
Have a look at the pictures. The whole of makka was flooded on a regular basis before the Saudis took some measure (huge tanks and reservoir to absorb the floods). And even with those measure the masjid al haram gets almost flooded from time to time
You can see it here with this video from 2011 https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=L38-VLgDh80
Or just google "makka flood" and lok for the picturesPeace.
Olaf
-
After this thread, I am really interested to know the story of Makkah from History and archeological aspects? Is there a study done for this? This is a separate topic and the author should have focused on the facts rather than legends of muwaia.
I failed to understand the motive of this thread?
cheers
Thanks to runninglikezebras for taking time to translate the writing. Unfortunately, the original writer has merely written a soap opera capable of competing against Dallas! Reason It has way too many loopholes.
First of all, "according to tradition" does not reinforce history, but legends.
A new revelation that rhymes, can be memorized entirely by a 3 year old, finishes talking about 71 people exactly in 71 words and has built in firewall?
Too bad that they didn?t keep the preaching ?we are god?s chosen people? in that book. It would have made things far easier in their conquest missions. Its also a great foolish thing to not add a verse ?Obey Allah, messenger and rulers?.Just what I expected. Yeah, lets keep playing the conquest game even though the temperature in our location is usually 120, even though we hardly find cool water, even though our population never seems to increase, even though we hardly have a good economy, even though it can be extremely difficult to set up camp in desert without being seen from distance by our enemies, even though we might not have food after a few days of our journey to target land because there is no supermarket and vegetable plants in our sandy location, even though while walking we can?t prevent hot sand from making us suffer in the legs, even though horses can become dehydrated, even though their only alternative for us is the slow camel, even though our sun is hot enough to kill us, even though we are already divided....
Once again, I appreciate your hard work runninglikezebras.
As for the writer, it is extremely clear that he knows nothing about the geography, living standard and past economy of Middle East. But again, history has a habit of violating even laws of physics. He didn't even take time to study what is in the Quran for which his narrative about it is snake oil. This book does not claim to be new revelation.
I am done with this thread. I thought I would find something realistic. But that didn't happen.
peace
-
@ reel
I am the author of this "soap opera". I am very thankfull to Runninglikezebras for his translation. At this point, there are many pages left to be translated, including a short quranic study.
A new revelation that rhymes, can be memorized entirely by a 3 year old, finishes talking about 71 people exactly in 71 words and has built in firewall?
Wait for the rest of the translation, you will learn how the quran has been written and rewritten by grammar, rhyme and theology specialists, which is why many muslims today find its content "miraculous". No wonder they wrote it exactly for this purpose.
As for the writer, it is extremely clear that he knows nothing about the geography, living standard and past economy of Middle East. But again, history has a habit of violating even laws of physics. He didn't even take time to study what is in the Quran for which his narrative about it is snake oil.
What good is your judgement about my book, if you haven't read it entirely ? Especially the parts about the quran ? Be patient !
-
Buddy come here and I will let you meet with people who knew their town history before Islam even came.
They know every details of it from generations past generations and it is there in their old books and poems.When you see the place, trust me you would not want to live there at all. Sheer desert with no water and green around and yet they survived thousands of years.
You should see places around Makkah and overall the Saudi Arabia, and you will find more worse places to ever be lived by people but you will come to know from people and artifacts that dates back to pre-Islamic era. There is a musem in Riyadh where I saw stuff put on from all different parts of country.
My point is as Reel said, you should have conducted your study by visiting places, meeting with people, trying to understand the geography and then complete your book.
Cheers
Really ? Would you live in a place that gets flooded on regularly basis ? Who would ?
