How Did it Come to This? (Part 1)
-
Just saw it.. interesting hypothesis..
Relatively makes more sense compared to "All Started In Yemen" or "All Started In Mecca" theory..But don't forget all the spot on tallying between place names of the Quran and place names in Yemeni Arabic Poetry, as highlighted by br Pazuzu. hmm
-
Peace, i think regardless of the viewpoint, it does seem that 'the sacred house' (i cant remember the exact arabic whether al-bayt al-maqdoos maybe, or whether i am confusing that with what it is know as in hebrew, as they are so close) and hence, the 'standing place of abraham' etc are in jerusalem, by the weight of evidence..
it would seem al-masjid al-haram is there too, but as you say, petra is an interesting, and still possibly plausible case..
i havent watched the video, as i cant/dont watch videos, but i have read alot of material on it.
summaries for those of us without a decent internet?? haha?
Peace
The points the video tries to make are
- The word Mecca is never mentioned in the Quran.
- The Mecca is known to be a sacred place by all the muslims in the world and the Kaaba is location that is used by muslims to pray, yet the earliest use of the world Mecca happens way after the death of the prophet.
- The author of the vides claims that the world Bakka isn't the equivalent of Mecca as Bakka is being portrayed as a valley, flourished and full of vegetations, yet Mecca isn't know to be the exact opposite of this.
- The author claims Mecca is never mentioned in any ancient Map he came across and that archeological evidences, such as name of cities written on stones (during the time of Islam) don't show the name Mecca.
- Some of the archeological evidence, from external sources (not islamic sources) mention a kaaba being used by pagans to perform their rituals, yet the location mentioned by these sources don't coincide with the position of the current kaaba(based in Mecca) or for that matter the previous kaaba(known to be in Jerusalem),
- The part I found interesting was the Kaaba position in the mosques that were built during islam and have survived (there are 11 of them according to the author), all these mosques (although they have gone through reconstructions) give a hint about where muslims were used to position them selves when performing their prays, when their kaaba position was intersected, the intersection coincided with Petra.
-
I think in regards to that, the author claims how easy it is to change Bakkah to Makkah and that this could have been a deliberate introduction by scribes (don't remember whether he said scribes or someone else)
So yeah, the author is also suggesting that there are errors in the Quran. -
By that count it is very easy to change anything in the Qur'an, why just that?
To uphold such a thing there must be proof beyond doubt. Of course everybodody i free to try anythig out while studying and exploring, but if we start to indulge in "oh yes that might be chaged" the we will ed up havinng a patchwork handcraft and no Qur'an at all.
I suppose that making Makka wrong suits the idea of the person who says it might be or it i wrong.
I do not think anything in the Qur'an is wrog, God gurantees it nd still I have to come to a place in Qur'an where I think it must be wrong, there is no other possibility. Wemay not find it, but I have yet to find something where I cannot see any isue but change. And then change for what? Ha? Is that going to be better tha what we have?
What I have ideed found is that again and again and agai is that the eople make mistakes but the Qur'an makes no mistakes.
But, that too, there seems to be a real, real puh to have Al Quds and Palestine as the setting of everything, of course not by those humble names, but by sacralising it with names of ore standing.
I am not pushing to have Makka sacralised, in fact, I am far from that, but what I amnot going to do is desacralise Makka so sacralise something else. And again, up till now, the most convincing and documented version of this is as Pazuzu has presented in his four books. A really great, great job. But... it does not pander to any of the pressure groups, that is its great unforgivable failure.
Salaam
-
That's why it's called a hypothesis and no one has claimed such things to be a fact.
Making Makkah might suit people wanting it to be wrong but the purpose of such research is to find the truth,have hard evidence about extraordinary claims, if we start blaming people, who make controversial claims, by saying that such claims are made by people to suit their interests then we are not different than those people that actually make such claims.
The change of the word from Bakkah to Makkah it's not really an evidence, it was explained by the author as an hypothesis and it is is indeed a weak one, yet it's not illogical;
I think it will be interesting to see if we have the following sources
-How Makkah has been described in islamic and non-islamic sources.
-References to the kibla in islamic and non-islamic sources.
-What methods were used to to build mosques during the islamic period and how accurate these methods were.
-If the author's claims about kiblas position of the 11 mosques is accurate.Does anyone know of old manuscripts of the Quran that are still preserved?
I have searched but not sure what is the best way to search for these as the results always show the latest news about the Quranic manuscript found in Birmingham.
It would be nice to know if some of the verses, written on stones,leather,skins, are preserved somewhere and whether they have been digitalised.Salaam
-
peace huruf, all,
Mecca is mentionned in the Qur'an
48.24
Not necessarily.
This has been debated a lot on here and elsewhere. To my knowledge, the conclusion was if we accept the tashkeel/vocalisation/diacritical marks as is (which are a later addition to the text of Arabic Quran) then "makkah" is a proper noun in 4824. If we allow for the possibility that the tashkeel may not be correct, then other meanings such as "destruction" / "crowding" can work.
From my studies "crowding" seems to fit best and coincidentally shares this meaning with "bakkah".
In any case, even if one accepts it as the city of Makkah, from my studies of Quran, it suggests that the model Abraham setup (i.e. the hajj/commemoration feast/festival) wherever that was (some claim it was Makkah despite evidence to the contrary) was re-instituted wherever the messenger of Quran was, be it at Makkah or elsewhere. This model could be utilised by others, wherever they are, i.e. the specific land is not important. Discussed here
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-masjid-al-haram-Quran.html
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-hajj-Quran.htmlYou can read a detailed discussion of this issue here
https//groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/soc.religion.islam/tLAAPiZh8MI
Interesting observation http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9598276.msg201108#msg201108 -
peace huruf, all,
Not necessarily.
This has been debated a lot on here and elsewhere. To my knowledge, the conclusion was if we accept the tashkeel/vocalisation/diacritical marks as is (which are a later addition to the text of Arabic Quran) then "makkah" is a proper noun in 4824. If we allow for the possibility that the tashkeel may not be correct, then other meanings such as "destruction" / "crowding" can work.
From my studies "crowding" seems to fit best and coincidentally shares this meaning with "bakkah".
In any case, even if one accepts it as the city of Makkah, from my studies of Quran, it suggests that the model Abraham setup (i.e. the hajj/commemoration feast/festival) wherever that was (some claim it was Makkah despite evidence to the contrary) was re-instituted wherever the messenger of Quran was, be it at Makkah or elsewhere. This model could be utilised by others, wherever they are, i.e. the specific land is not important. Discussed here
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-masjid-al-haram-Quran.html
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-hajj-Quran.htmlYou can read a detailed discussion of this issue here
https//groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/soc.religion.islam/tLAAPiZh8MI
Interesting observation http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9598276.msg201108#msg201108Whether Makka mean this or that is one thing. That it is written in the Qur'an is another.
A friend of mine said that that Bakka and Makka are complentary, like a heart first if fills then it empties, hwhich repreents de crowding and the uncrowding of whatever.
I stick to Makka as right. Could have been... it is just that could have been. Riminds me of the hadith about if eer God had ordered somebody to postrate to somebody else i would have...
Very nice, if... it could have been = 0
Salaam
-
From
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-masjid-al-haram-Quran.html4824 And He is the One who withheld their hands against you, and your hands against them in midst/interior (of) crowding/MaKKah, after He had made you victorious over them. God is Seer of what you do.
4825 They are those who concealed/rejected and hindered you from/concerning* al maSJD al haram, and prevented the offering/gift from reaching its permitted/lawful place. And if not for believing men and believing women whom you did not know, that you may trample them so would befall you from them sin without knowledge, that God may admit in His mercy whomever He wills. If they had been apart** surely We would then have punished those who concealed/rejected among them with a painful retribution.
4826 When those who concealed/rejected had put in their hearts disdain, the disdain of the ignorance, then God sent down His tranquility upon His messenger and upon the believers, and made them adhere to the word of righteousness/God-consciousness, and they were more deserving of it and worthy of it. And God is fully aware of all things.
4827 Certainly, God has confirmed His messenger's vision*** with truth/reality, surely you (plural) will enter al masjid al haram, if God wills, securing/trusting, unburdening/relieving your chiefs/representatives****, and restraining/relinquishing not fearing. So, He knew what you did not know, and He made besides that a victory near/close.
4828 He is the One who sent His messenger with the guidance and the system/obligation of truth, so that it would expose all other systems. And God is sufficient as a witness.*Arabic AAani is a preposition and can mean from, of, for, about, concerning.
**implies they are all mixed together. One possible meaning of MKK is "crowding" hence the rendition above -
Peace all,
if i recall correctly, is not neither makkah and bi-bakkah proper nouns?
i am not highly skilled in arabic, but in my understanding, they are both definite, due to their context, but what makes them proper nouns? which in my understanding, a place name is, or should be?
i could well be incorrect. if i am, it is the fault of my lack of understanding, if not, prehaps there is something to look into
-
Peace Bahman,
bravo bravo bravo
Shivers ran down my spine when all the mosque directions converged on one spot!
I downloaded this video because I am pretty sure it will disappear!
Peace
Peace
You were right.
would you send me a copy to my email please [email protected]
Peace -
Peace Bahman,
bravo bravo bravo
Shivers ran down my spine when all the mosque directions converged on one spot!
I downloaded this video because I am pretty sure it will disappear!
Peace
Peace, i would also be keen to see the video, if you can send it to me somehow i can upload it to islamtogether.org, provided it is appropriate, so that anyone is free to watch if you wish. and if God has willed,
poeace be with you
-
Peace all,
Following are the original websites of the video (The Sacred City)
http//searchformecca.com/
http//www.sidewaysfilm.com/the-sacred-city/
Website where you can watch it free
https//gloria.tv/video/agon3t8peViDMAEe24Zhc8CT6
Following is free PDF summary of the book the video is based on (Qur'anic Geography)
http//searchformecca.com/Mecca%20Question.pdf
Following video is also interesting
https//m.youtube.com/watch?v=inJ1mCIsz5A
If anyone wants to hear from the non-Muslim opposition camp, following is an interesting video lecture that shows evidence of Petra as the original city (some evidence is based on hadeeth but mostly Quranic and archeological evidence)
https//m.youtube.com/watch?v=CAq22E3E_Us
Peace
-
Peace all,
In the last video, the speaker tries to use the evidence that shows Petra instead of Mecca as the original city to discredit Islam. One puzzling thing is he gives 5th century CE as carbon dating of Sanaa manuscripts. If correct, this puts the revelation of the Quran much earlier than the currently accepted dates, which correlates with Hizbullah's research!
Peace
-
Peace all,
In the last video, the speaker tries to use the evidence that shows Petra instead of Mecca as the original city to discredit Islam. One puzzling thing is he gives 5th century CE as carbon dating of Sanaa manuscripts. If correct, this puts the revelation of the Quran much earlier than the currently accepted dates, which correlates with Hizbullah's research!
Peace
According to my research as well. Petra is a decent theory. I know the "modern" Arabic script was developed in the northern part of Arabia. The first scriptural physical evidence of modern style Arabic is from the early part of the first millennium A.D. Quran is an early work in the at the time new script. The Sana'a manuscripts give new light to be able to see the poor fibers in the fabrics of the sect Islam.
Mecca with its building was just a kind of chapel with one arch-shaped wall faced towards Sinai or Jerusalem (I have not measured with any precision, but it is in that direction), like most other religious buildings belonging to the Abrahamic sects.
I have many ways of discrediting the sect Islam, it only takes actually accepting the evidence including my skill in deciphering Arabic.
Be well
Amenuel -
Peace all,
In the last video, the speaker tries to use the evidence that shows Petra instead of Mecca as the original city to discredit Islam. One puzzling thing is he gives 5th century CE as carbon dating of Sanaa manuscripts. If correct, this puts the revelation of the Quran much earlier than the currently accepted dates, which correlates with Hizbullah's research!
Peace
Thank you my brother truthseeker11
According to my research as well. Petra is a decent theory. I know the "modern" Arabic script was developed in the northern part of Arabia. The first scriptural physical evidence of modern style Arabic is from the early part of the first millennium A.D. Quran is an early work in the at the time new script. The Sana'a manuscripts give new light to be able to see the poor fibers in the fabrics of the sect Islam.
Mecca with its building was just a kind of chapel with one arch-shaped wall faced towards Sinai or Jerusalem (I have not measured with any precision, but it is in that direction), like most other religious buildings belonging to the Abrahamic sects.
I have many ways of discrediting the sect Islam, it only takes actually accepting the evidence including my skill in deciphering Arabic.
Be well
AmenuelThe link below tells us exactly where was the Bless Land, to be exact 50 km south of Mecca!
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9608396.0
-
Peace all,
In the last video, the speaker tries to use the evidence that shows Petra instead of Mecca as the original city to discredit Islam. One puzzling thing is he gives 5th century CE as carbon dating of Sanaa manuscripts. If correct, this puts the revelation of the Quran much earlier than the currently accepted dates, which correlates with Hizbullah's research!
Peace
Peace, video typical missionary bible thumping used car salesman; Sana are not dated 5th century i.e. 401 - 500 CE.
As to direction of early mosques, how many did they actually check from Spain to China before 720 CE 1/2 dozen?
Perhaps at that time they were not too concerned about direction and simply faced the direction of sunrise/sunset?
2115 and to god al-mashriqu/the east (i.e. direction of sunrise) wal-maghribu/and the west (direction of sunset) so wherever of turn ye of so there face/countenance the god surely the god extensive knower
Likewise here are 3 separate manuscripts chapter 20 same style and approximate date...
Sana Manuscripts
http//www.unesco-ci.org/photos/showphoto.php/photo/3448/title/all-qur-27anic-fragments/cat/837Probability older than CE...
635.5 56.20%
640.5
645.5 75.10%
650.5
655.5
660.5 95.50%
665.5
670.5
675.5 99.20%http//oi64.tinypic.com/k2bxfm.jpg
MA VI 165 Qur?an 95.4% probability between 649-675 CE
http//idb.ub.uni-tuebingen.de/diglit/MaVI165
http//oi64.tinypic.com/293cdo4.jpg
Birmingham Qur?an 95.4% probability between 568-645 CE
http//www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/cadbury/quran-manuscript/index.aspx
http//oi68.tinypic.com/28vad82.jpg
-
According to my research as well. Petra is a decent theory. I know the "modern" Arabic script was developed in the northern part of Arabia. The first scriptural physical evidence of modern style Arabic is from the early part of the first millennium A.D. Quran is an early work in the at the time new script. The Sana'a manuscripts give new light to be able to see the poor fibers in the fabrics of the sect Islam.
Mecca with its building was just a kind of chapel with one arch-shaped wall faced towards Sinai or Jerusalem (I have not measured with any precision, but it is in that direction), like most other religious buildings belonging to the Abrahamic sects.
I have many ways of discrediting the sect Islam, it only takes actually accepting the evidence including my skill in deciphering Arabic.
Be well
Amenueli havent seen much in the sana'a manuscripts apart from what is likely errors in the quran that was memorized which were later corrected, hence why according to my understanding, both layers of text contain errors, i still make errors copying the quran from the text, and more when i write it down from memory, and i correct them when i become aware of them. such is the faliability of human beings.. i am not suspicious about the manuscripts, as yet i have seen no major discrepencies in any of them
islam is not a sect.
peace be with all of you
-
Peace Bahman,
bravo bravo bravo
Shivers ran down my spine when all the mosque directions converged on one spot!
I downloaded this video because I am pretty sure it will disappear!
Peace
Ugh, it did disappear. What was in it?
Edit Never mind, saw your next links. Thanks.
