Islamic Jihad Update
Intelligent minds want to know WHY our President allows a terrorist to be returned to his/her country of origin AT ALL; when that is where they came from in the first place at the inception of their terrorist ways? In May, 2013, President Obama even added insult to injury by removing
Our President even takes the side of these liberal wonks against U.S. security by continuing to pledge to close
All that aside I’ve got here basically.. I don’t want to say he said she said but I’ve got two sides of the story that are in conflict with each other.
The [plaintiff] has not proven to me beyond a reasonable doubt that this defendant is guilty of harassment, therefore I am going to dismiss the charge.
Islam is not just a religion, it’s their culture, their culture. It’s their very essence, their very being… Then what you have done is you have completely trashed their essence, their being. They find it very very very offensive. I’m a Muslim, I find it offensive. But you have that right, but you’re way outside your boundaries or first amendment rights.
Secularists (westernized) who believe secular law should not be based on religion. Very few, if any, Muslims adhere to this dogma because it is the antithesis of sharì’a (Ahmad, 2009).
Traditionalists-- secular laws should be based on sharì’a, particularly, in the area of women’s rights and slavery. Any departure from the Koran’s handmaiden (sharì’a) is of Satan and has no place in Islam. This group (e.g., the Wahabbi of Saudi Arabia) holds sway over the "mainstream" Muslim.
Reformers who believe that a "modernized" Islam can coexist with modern, secular doctrine. This group does not really exist in Islam but, is the popular mythology (taqiyya) fostered by Muslim clerics and laity to rebut its critics.
"...I began to notice differences between what I heard the government say or what was taught in school, and what was really happening in the world, but I learned to keep such thoughts to myself in order to get along. Then 9-11 happened and it turned the world upside down, my own perception of it in particular. I wanted to be surprised that Muslims had carried out mass murder explicitly in the name of Islam, but I wasn’t."
"...Deciding that Islam as an ideology (and not Muslims per se) was my enemy was a personal Rubicon for me, a step that, once taken, could never be retracted. I understood how serious this was, from my own studies of Islam, from my knowledge of what’s happened to other critics of Islam, and from the repeated warnings here in Malaysia regarding ‘insults’ to Islam (being too truthful about it). And the pointed Malaysian warnings about being ‘respectful’ of...Islam is all the government here really cares about make it very clear that criticism of Islam is a big, big red line that should never be crossed. Furthermore, in Malaysia it’s quite legal for anyone to be arrested and held indefinitely without charge, trial or access to legal council. It’s a law called the ‘Internal Security Act’ or ‘ISA’ for short and it’s positively medieval. ISA is one of the reasons that you rarely hear criticism of Islam from anyone in this country, in public and even in private, no matter how outrageous things get..."
"Malaysians will typically tell foreigners that all members of all religions are treated ‘equally’ and get along amicably. That’s the image sold overseas, at any rate. The reality is quite different. Islam is the official state religion, so it enjoys all sorts of official and unofficial privileges, such as lavish state-built mosques, massive taxpayer-funded proselytization programs for Muslims (but not for other belief systems), sprawling Government-run Islamic universities, a distinct pro-Islamic and pro-jihad tilt in the state-owned and influenced media, and more."
The US Dept. of Homeland Security’s Office of the Inspector General’s May 11, 2011, report Supervision of Aliens Commensurate with Risk. Israel is listed, among the following countries, as on which exports terrorism: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Djiboudi, Egypt, Eritrea (horn of Africa), Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kazakhistan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Muaritania, Morocco, Gaza West Bank, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, and Yemen.
Weiss, Bernard G., In The Spirit of Islamic Law, p. 17 (Alta Mira Press, 1998). Definition of the term ‘sharì’a’ and its evolution since ancient times. Quotes retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia, fn 16.
Little, Jane, Debate rages over women and Sharia, BBC News article dated June 11, 2003. Recovered from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2977446.stm.
O’Connell, Kelly, Crime & Punishment in Islamic Law, Candada Free Press, September 26, 2010. To Western eyes, the Shari’ah presents a disorganized and incomplete description of Criminal Law. Retrieved from http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/28083.
O’Stien, Phillip, Islamic Criminal Law: What it Means in Zamfara and Niger States, Journal of Public and Private Law 4, pp. 1-18 (2000). A copy of this treatise may be obtained at:
Quotes from the Malaysian former Muslim apologist, referenced above, are take from http://frontpagemag.com/2011/06/22/islam%E2%80%99s-persecution-of-christians-in-malaysia/.
Toameh, Khaled Abu, Muslim Genocide of Christians Throughout Middle East, article in Hudson New York (November 26, 2010). A non-Muslim in a Muslim country is an "endangered species" with Christians are being targeted almost on a daily basis. Retrieved from: http://www.hudson-ny.org/1685/muslim-genocide-of-christians
http://india.indymedia.org/en/2003/07/6251.shtml "Islam stands for Intolerance, Slaughter, Loot, Arson and Molestation".
Ahmad, Ayesha, article in Islam Online, April 22, 2009. Secularism is the antithesis of Islam. Retrieved from: http://www.truthandgrace.com/muslimhateforsecularism.htm. For her blog, see, http://www.islam-watch.org/AyeshaAhmed/index.html
Pat J. Merriman
An Overview of the Problem
The episode reached a climax when, after failed attempts to negotiate a release, the United States military attempted a rescue operation, Operation Eagle Claw, on April 24, 1980, which failed miserably resulting in the destruction of two military aircraft[ii] and the deaths of eight American servicemen and one Iranian civilian. The US was a laughing stock and, the entire fiasco dragged on for another year only ending with the signing of the Algiers Accords in Algeria on January 19, 1981. The hostages were formally released into United States custody the following day, just minutes after the new American president Ronald Reagan was sworn in. Because, as one source put it, Reagan’s administration understood the Muslim mindset but, did not care and, the United States was now going to apply the dogma that the Iranians had committed an act of war and, as Commander-in- Chief, he was going to address the matter in a military (not diplomatic) manner. Applying the only historical remedy for the Muslim invasion--brute force.
Correctly stated, the crisis has been described as an entanglement of
“vengeance and mutual incomprehension”. In Iran, the hostage taking was
widely seen as a blow against the imperialistic, colonist United States, and its
interference in Iran, its perceived attempts to undermine the Iranian
Revolution, and its long-standing support of the Shah of Iran, recently
overthrown by that revolution. Recall that the Shah had been restored to power,
in lieu of a Sharia government, in a 1953 coup against a
“democratically-elected” nationalist Iranian government organized by the
The “crisis” was instrumental in the defeat of Jimmy Carter (a dove) by Reagan (the hawk) in 1980. Regardless, there is also no doubt that the incident strengthened both the prestige of the Ayatollah Khomeini (a fundamentalist Muslim) and that factions stranglehold on the theocracy that was Iranian Islam and its influence in the Middle East. Our economic sanctions against Iran did little more than further weaken our relationship with that government and polarize the region further against United States’ interference, what the locals believed, to be their own, internal matter which was no business of the United States. Historically, in February 1979 (less than a year before the hostage crisis), Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran, had been overthrown by Muslim revolution.
This Shah (the son of Shah Reza) had been installed by Allied powers in World War II to thwart his father’s alignment of his petroleum-rich country with Nazi Germany during that war. However, Reza Shah’s “Declaration of Neutrality” and refusal to allow Iranian territory to be used to train, supply, and act as a transport corridor to ship arms to Russia for its war effort against Germany, was the strongest motive for the ultimate allied invasion and occupation of Iran. Because of its importance in the allied victory, Iran was subsequently called “The Bridge of Victory” by Winston Churchill and, had been America’s puppet ever since.
By the 1950s, the Shah was engaged in a power struggle with Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddeq, an immediate descendant of the previous monarchy, the Qajar dynasty. In 1953, the British and US spy agencies deposed the democratically-elected government of Mossaddeq in a military coup d’état codenamed Operation Ajax, and restored the Shah as an absolute monarch. This “anti-democratic” coup was viewed by the Muslim as a critical intrusion into the internal politics of a sovereign nation during the Cold War, essentially, replacing a post- monarchic, native, and secular parliamentary democracy with a dictatorship. This was particularly offensive to the Iranian Muslim who viewed the CIA’s coup, along with its training of the hated Iranian Secret Police (SAVAK), as anathema and a Holy War against Islam. In subsequent decades this foreign intervention, along with other economic, cultural and political issues which inured under the Shah’s tight-fisted regime, ultimately, led to his overthrow and the events of November, 1979, at least as viewed by the Muslim.
Compounding this perceived US “imperialism”, shortly before the revolution, on New Year’s Day 1979, President Carter further enraged anti-Shah Iranians with a televised toast to the Shah, declaring how beloved the Shah was by his people. Little known to the American public, shortly after the revolution in February, the US Embassy had actually been occupied, and its staff held hostage, briefly by rock-throwing and armed “students” of the revolution. Rocks and bullets had actually broken enough of the embassy front- facing windows for them to be replaced with bullet-proof glass. Its staff was reduced, by Carter, to just over 60 from a high of nearly 1000 earlier in the decade. Belying the official pronouncements that the taking of the American hostages was not foreseen by American intelligence.
The Carter administration continued to step on its own feet by ignoring its own embassy personnel, in Tehran, and agreeing to allow the Shah, on October 22, 1979, to come to the US for cancer treatment. The Shah’s admission to the US simply intensified Iranian revolutionaries’ anti-Americanism and spawned rumors of another US-backed coup to reinstall the Shah in lieu of the “legitimate” government being formed by the Revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (who had been exiled by the Shah for 15 years). America became the “Great Satan” a title it has never lost in the Muslim world. Again, invoking tribal, Sharia law, the Muslim simply intones that the US had no right to complain about the 1979 hostages because we had taken their whole country hostage in 1953.
Some say that modern Islamist “student”, guerrilla tactics were honed during the events in Tehran. These “students” had observed the security procedures of the Marine Security Guards from nearby rooftops overlooking the embassy. They also used experiences from the recent revolution, during which the US embassy grounds were briefly occupied. They enlisted the support of police in charge of guarding the embassy and of Islamic Revolutionary Guards. Their success in the matter greatly enhanced the prestige of the new Jihad against the great superpower, the United States, which was impotent to do anything about it under the Carter Administration. Theocratic Islamists, as well as leftist political groups world-wide, and figures like the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, publicly supported the taking of American hostages as an attack on “American imperialism” and its alleged Iranian “tools of the West.” And, the US took no action other than diplomacy- the time-tested method of failure with Islam.
In hindsight, it did not help that
Iranian takhia (propaganda) stated that the hostages were “guests” treated with respect. Ibrahim Asgharzadeh cranked up the media machine described the original hostage taking plan as a “nonviolent” and symbolic action where the “gentle and respectful treatment” of the hostages would dramatize to the whole world the offended sovereignty and dignity of Iran. In America, an Iranian charge d’affairs, Ali Agha, stormed out of meeting with an American official, exclaiming “We are not mistreating the hostages. They are being very well taken care of in Tehran. They are our guests.” In Iran one guard told several hostages “We want you to feel that you are our guests,” and complained that use of the word “guard” was “too cruel.” Visiting Iranian officials asked hostages “What can I do for you? We want to make you more comfortable” and, told another surprised hostage that they, the hostages, should be grateful that Iran was protecting them from attempts by the US government to kill them. And, confused, Americans waited for their government to take some action.
After Reagan’s election victory in 1980, the popular American mythology was that Iran released the hostages solely out of fear of the new administration. In fact, pre-election talks had resulted in an agreement, whereby, the US agreed to three Iranian demands (not including an apology). And, of course, the Iraqi invasion of Iran that year (blamed on the United States too) almost “blew the deal”. However, eventually, the matter merely came down to dollars and cents with Iran (content to live and fight for Islam another day) claiming that the United States owed them $20 to $60 billion and the United States estimating it at “closer to $20 to 60 million” after the embargo. Reagan’s election year rhetoric of not paying “ransom for people who have been kidnapped by barbarians” yielded the New Years Day threat from Radio Tehran that if the US did not accept Iran’s demands the hostages would be tried as spies and executed. Regardless, on November 2, 1980, the Iranian parliament finally set forth formal conditions for the hostages’ release and eight days later Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher arrived in Algiers with the first US reply setting off a slow motion diplomatic shuffle between Washington, Algiers and Tehran.
These negotiations resulted in the “Algiers Accords” of January 19, 1981, which provided that Iran would immediately free the hostages, unfreezing of $7.9 billion of Iranian assets, and granting absolute immunity from foreign lawsuits that Iran might have rightly faced in American courts. More importantly, America learned its political lesson in the Middle East when the United States pledged that “it is and from now on will be the policy of the United States not to intervene, directly or indirectly, politically or militarily, in Iran’s internal affairs.” The hostages were released on the day President Carter’s term ended because the hostage-takers are thought to have wanted the release delayed as punishment for his perceived support for the Shah. Iranians insisted on payment in gold rather than US dollars so the US government transferred 50 tons of gold to Iran while simultaneously taking ownership of an equivalent quantity of Iranian gold that had been frozen at the New York Federal Reserve Bank. As bad as America’s image was tarnished by this episode, this “resolution” still fared much better for the United States than the 1829, Iranian invasion of the Russian Embassy where the Russian ambassador, Alexander Griboyedov was beheaded by his captors.
Regardless, these events graphically demonstrate the deep divide between the
Muslim and Western mind, as it relates to jihad, the moral high ground and who
is fighting a religious war. The Iranian hostage crisis was merely a preview of
coming attractions for this country.
In determining where Islam is headed in the New Millennium, an understanding of where the Arab world has been is essential. In that regard, the ancient Arab story begins before the history of the Jewish (and Arab) patriarch Abraham (circa 2018 BC)[iv]. Sheba, the Anglicized Hebrew spelling of Saba, the name of an ancient southwest Arabian kingdom roughly corresponding to the modern territory of Yemen, originally settled by Semites (from western or central Arabia) during the middle of 2000 BC. Excavations at Ma’rib, its capital, during the 20th century, have revealed an ancient, imposing temple to the moon god of the local, polytheistic pagans. The South Arabians, before Islam, were polytheists and revered a large number of deities. Most of these were astral in concept but the significance of only a few is known. It was essentially a planetary system in which the moon as a masculine deity prevailed. This, combined with the use of a star calendar by the agriculturists of certain parts, particularly the Hadramaut, indicates that there was an early reverence for the night sky. Amongst the South Arabians the worship of the moon continued, and it is almost certain that their religious calendar was also lunar and that their years were calculated by the position of the moon. The national god of each of the kingdoms or states was the Moon-god known by various names: ‘Ilumquh by the Sabaeans, ‘Amm and ‘Anbay by the Qatabanians, Wadd (love) by the Minaeans, and Sin by the Hadramis”. The term ‘God is Love’ is characteristic of “the Merciful”, the term later ascribed to Allah and, is also South Arabian.
The sun-goddess was the moon’s consort; she was perhaps best known in South Arabia as Dhat Hamym, ‘she who sends forth strong rays of benevolence’. Another dominant deity was the male god known as Athtar corresponding to Phoenician Astarte. Historian James Pritchard claims their pantheon included the moon god Sin etc., Shams (Shamash) and Athtar or Astarte as in the Semitic trinity, however, it would appear that the sun was female as the Canaanite Shapash who figures in Ugarit myth alongside Athtar. The earliest temple known is the Mahram Bilquis or Harem of the Queen of Sheba, previously called the Awwam the temple of the Moon God ‘Ilumquh which dates from around 700 BC, although its lower levels may be substantially older. Sabean moon worship extended through a long period of time to around 400 AD when it was overtaken by Judaism and Christianity around a century before Mohammed.
Bilquis was the Queen of the Sabeans (Sheba) in King Solomon’s time. Pre-Islamic poetry describes Solomon as a king of a universal kingdom of men, djinn[v] and winds with nine angels standing before him. Solomon built the castle al-Ablaq near Taima. Greek historian Diodorus Siculus (60-30 BC) notes: “This tribe [the Sabaeans] surpasses not only the neighboring Arabs but also all other men in wealth and in their several extravagances besides. For in the exchange and sale of their wares they, of all men who carry on trade for the sake of the silver they receive in exchange, obtain the highest price in return for things of the smallest weight. Consequently, since they have never, for ages, suffered the ravages of war because of their isolated position, and since an abundance of both gold and silver abounds in the country, they have embossed goblets of every description, made of silver and gold, couches and tripods with silver feet, and every other furnishing of incredible costliness, and halls encircled by large columns, some of them gilded, and others having silver figures on the capitals. Their ceilings and doors they partitioned by means of panels and coffers made of gold, set with precious stones and placed close together, and have thus made the structure of their houses in every part marvelous for its costliness; for some parts they have constructed of silver and gold, others of ivory and the most showy precious stones or of whatever else men esteem most highly”. Their sculpture and votive offerings were refined and admired.
Greek historian Strabo (64 BC-24 AD) noted that the king of Saba (Sheba) who “presides over the court of justice and other things” was not permitted to leave the palace, for if he did “the people would at once stone him, in consequence of a saying of an oracle”. While her tomb and documents of her time have yet to come to light, and remains of the tenth century BC are still largely unknown to archaeology, the recovery of a small amount of contemporary evidence together with a considerable amount of material from only three or four centuries later enables us to reconstruct a general outline of the Queen of Sheba’s culture[vi] with considerable probability. She would have lived surrounded by the accouterments of an affluent civilization: a thriving trade that brought unparalleled prosperity; an irrigation agriculture that provided ample subsistence; a distinctive architecture in stone that was second only to that of Egypt in the ancient Near East in its execution and variety of ornamentation; a richness in metallurgy and stone carving as well as an abundance of artists and artisans who pursued these vocations; a high degree of literacy among the people, who had a keen appreciation of the importance of a written language and of their beautiful alphabetic script; and an art that is representational in a symbolic archaic manner.
The great civilization of South Arabia was little known to the Arabs of Mohammed’s time, although, any of the Arab tribes of Mohammed’s day still had a tradition that they had lived in South Arabia before taking to the desert when the old civilization declined. Some tribes retained a memory of being settled there before conditions worsened, apparently connected with the Marib dam bursting[vii] and “Certainly there was a sign for Saba in their abode; two gardens on the right and the left; eat of the sustenance of your Lord and give thanks to Him: a good land and a Forgiving Lord! But they turned aside, so We sent upon them a torrent of which the rush could not be withstood, and in place of their two gardens We gave to them two gardens yielding bitter fruit and (growing) tamarisk and a few date-trees.”[viii] The Surah relates many of the episodes already found for example in the Targum Sheni, a further indication of the familiarity Mohammed had with details of Jewish literature outside the Pentateuch. Rather than being portrayed as a Jewish demon, Solomon is portrayed as a great man of God and master of the Djinn to whom Bilquis submits in acknowledgment of al-Llah (Allah).[ix]
A second prominent Arab culture had sprung up from Southern Sinai around 600 BC and from around 400 BC in the land of the Edomites in Jordan. The Nabateans had a close relationship with the Edomites as they each claim a female line of descent from Ishmael (the bastard son of the Jewish Patriarch Abraham), through Bashemath one of the three wives of Esau and her sister Nabaioth respectively. This also gave the Edomites descent from Isaac through Esau. The son of Esau and Bashemath was Ruel the Midianite father in Law of Moses. The Nabateans migrated from Arabia as shepherds and caravan traders who benefited from horse breeding and settled adaptably to form rich irrigated productive land with a prominent trade, centered on the previously unpopulated area round Petra - ‘a rose red city half as old as time’. During the time of Jesus, Nabatea was an independent Kingdom with its influence spreading to Damascus. Herod was involved in hostilities with Aretas IV (the King of Nabatea) because Herodias displaced Aretas’ daughter as Herod’s wife. Although they were annexed by the Romans they continued to be a significant Arab power to the time of Mohammed.
The Greek historian Herodotus (500 BC) says of the Arabs: “They deem no other to be gods save Dionysus and Heavenly Aphrodite … they call Dionysus Orotalt and Aphrodite Alilat”. In Sumeria Allatu, or ‘goddess’ is an epithet of Ereshkigal the chthonic goddess of the underworld. Like El and al-Llah which simply means god, al-Lat ‘goddess’ could be identified with many female deities, and indeed Allat is identified with Aphrodite-Venus. It is said that when Allat became the goddess of the Nabateans, she became al-Uzza the ‘mighty one’ as she evolved from a local deity into a patron of an expanding culture. Al-Uzza is also referred to in connection with the Bedouins at Harran, where it is said Bedouins sacrificed Christian virgins caught in battle to the Goddess.
Nabatean inscriptions in Sinai and other places display widespread references to names including Allah, El and Allat (god and goddess) , with regional references to al-Uzza, Ba’al and Manutu (Manat). Allat is also found in Sinai in South Arabian language. Allah occurs particularly as Garm-’allahi - god dedided (Greek Garamelos) and Aush-allahi - ‘gods covenant’ (Greek Ausallos). We find both Shalm-lahi ‘Allah is peace’ and Shalm-allat, ‘the peace of the goddess’. We also find Amat-allahi ‘she-servant of god’ and Halaf-llahi ‘the successor of Allah’.
A stele is dedicated to Qos-allah ‘Qos is Allah’ or ‘Qos the god’, by Qosmilk (melech - king) is found at Petra. Qos is identifiable with Kaush (Qaush) the God of the older Edomites. The stele is horned and the a seal from Edomite Tawilan near Petra identified with Kaush displays a star and crescent, both consistent with a moon deity. It is conceivable the latter could have resulted from trade with Harran. There is continuing debate about the nature of Qos (qaus - bow) who has been identified both with a hunting bow (hunting god) and a rainbow (weather god) although the crescent above is also a bow. There is no reference to Qos in the Old Testament, but Seir is one of the domains of Yahweh, suggesting a close relationship. His attributes in inscriptions include knowing, striking down, giving and light. Attempts have been made to also explain the existence of this scarab in the light of trade with Harran for which evidence has been found in cuneiform tablets.
The Nabateans had two principal gods in their pantheon, and a whole range of djinns (personal gods and spirits similar to angels). These deities were Dhu Shara, or Duchares and al-Uzza. Duchares means Lord of Shera (Seir), a local mountain and thunder god who was worshipped at a rock high place as a block of stone frequently squared, just as Hermes was the four-square god. Suidas in the tenth century AD described it as a ‘cubic’ black stone of dimension 4x2x1. All the deities male and female were represented as stones or god-blocks. Duchares was a Zeus-like mountain deity of Jebel Shara, with associations with sacred kingship whose rites took a prominent place in the scheme of worship. Notably King Obodas became Zeus Oboda. He is described on a dam inscription as ‘Dushara the god of Gaia’. He was celebrated as a god of immortality celebrated by a Dionysian tragic mask of death, in which its wearer became united with him, thus escaping the limitations of the mortal span. He is surrounded by dolphins as was Dionysus. Al-Uzza was a deity of springs and water, as befits a fertility goddess, and as such she would have been reverenced in Petra with particular devotion”. Manathu (the Manat of Islam) was the patron goddess of Petra, being Fortuna having a similar role to Semitic Gad. As Moon Goddess Tyche she was also Fortune holding a cornucopia of overflowing fruit.
The Nabateans originally were tent-dwelling shepherds renowned, like their fellow tribe the Recchabites, for eschewing houses, planted crops or wine, in their case on penalty of death, a sentiment shared by Mohammed, who looked with contempt upon the Kuryshites and Ansari “for they employ themselves with sowing seeds”. “The divine glory is among the shepherds, vanity and impudence among the agricultural peoples”. However agricultural settlement brought changes and the Greek period (331-300 BC) produced a hybrid culture. Al-Uzza became identified with Atargatis-Aphrodite and Duchares with Dionysus. Friezes, including grape vines are prominent, consistent with Dionysian rites, which historian Ian Browning concedes may have become the “pornographic pop concerts which came to debase the once-glorious cult of Dionysos.” Historian Nelson Glueck is even more forthright: “Rich food in plenty and strong wine without stint helped bring the deities and ther worshippers into fervid relationship. Bar-Hebraeus quoted Psalm 12:8 of Nabatean women “the wicked walk on every side while vileness is exalted among the sons of men”. The scope and nature of the temples supports both males and females being worshippers of the cults.
The Nabateans, like the Harranians, followed a complex system of astral worship, involving the sun and moon and seven major planets, in which in her varying forms, the Goddess represented Venus and the Moon. As Moon Goddess she is identifiable with Tyche, Selene and Atargatis-Artemis of Hierapolis. Selene was worshipped in the new and full moon. She stands prima inter pares at the center of the main deities of the Nabatean pantheon the seven planets and the zodiac, although sometimes displaced by Zeus. The snake twined eagle is shown in at least one relief standing above both the sun and moon at Jebel Druze. However the fertility goddess, who was also in her aspects the dolphin-crowned Sea Goddess (Aphrodite-Mari) of seafarers and the Moon Goddess clearly dominates the sculptures at Khirbet Tannur, the outstanding Nabataean high sanctuary, archetypal of the biblical high places.
There are fewer archaeological remains of the deities of Mecca, and much of the information about them comes from Muslim historians such as al-Kalbi.[x] Pre-Islamic worship of the goddess seems to be primarily associated with Al’Lat, which simply means ‘goddess’. She is a triple goddess, similar to the Greek lunar deity Kore/Demeter/Hecate. Each aspect of this trinity corresponds to a phase of the moon. In the same way Al’Lat has three names known to the initiate: Q’re, the crescent moon or the maiden; Al’Uzza, literally ‘the strong one’ who is the full moon and the mother aspect; then Al’Menat, the waning but wise goddess of fate, prophecy and divination. Islamic tradition continue to recognize these three but labels them ‘daughters of Allah’, or banat al-Llah, firmly associating al-Llah as a pre-Islamic deity paired with the three forms of the Goddess.
According to Edward Rice[xi], as quoted in Campenhausen[xii], Al’Uzza was especially worshipped at the Ka’bah where she was served by seven priestesses. Her worshippers circled the holy stone seven times - once for each of the ancient seven planets - and did so in total nudity. Near the Ka’bah is the well, Zamzam, which cools the throats of the countless millions of pilgrims. Dawood says that Al’Lat, Al’Uzza, and Manat ‘represented the Sun, Venus, and Fortune respectively, but Allat is also described as a representation of Venus[xiii], and she once had a temple in the precinct devoted to the sun-god Shamash in Hatra, Iraq[xiv]. In early Mesopotamian art, the only heavenly bodies regularly shown as a group were the triad of Sun, Moon, and Venus, the three most important celestial lights; and in Sumer and early Babylon the sun and moon were represented mainly by a male divinity, though elsewhere in the Semitic world the moon was usually regarded as feminine.
In Islam, the moon is considered the holiest astronomical object, and moon is the guiding light of all Islamic rituals/festivals. The crescent moon and stars are the symbolic sign in the national flags of many Muslim countries, and it is present over the Mosques, in the Muslim graveyard and so on. The Moon was also male divinity in ancient Semitic religion, and the Arabic word for the moon “qamar’’ is of the masculine gender, on the other hand, the Arabic word for sun “shams” is feminine gender, reflecting the pattern in Sa’aba. But, there is also a strong chance that their form and function of these deities were influenced by the banat, the three daughters of Ba’al, the supreme deity of the Canaanites. They symbolized light, rain, and earth[xv]. In Arabian archaeology a large number of inscriptions on rocks, tablets and walls, have pointed to the worship of a family of four; one male and his three ‘daughters’ or goddesses. Those three goddesses are sometimes engraved together with Allah, represented by a crescent moon above them. But Allah was the ‘Lord of the Kaaba… Lord of Manat, al-Lat, and al-Uzza…and even as ‘Lord of Sirius’. His ‘daughters’ were his associates, helpers and were themselves worshipped, after the manner of ancient Babylonian customs and symbolized by astronomical symbols.
Every family in Mecca also had, at home, an idol which they worshipped. Whenever one of them purposed to set out on a journey, his last act before leaving the house would be to touch the idol in hope of an auspicious journey; and on his return, the first thing he would do was to touch it again in gratitude for a propitious return. The Arabs were passionately fond of worshipping idols. Some of them took unto themselves a temple around which they centered their worship, while others adopted an idol to which they offered their adoration. The person who was unable to build himself a temple or adopt an idol would erect a stone in front of the Sacred House or in front of any other temple which he might prefer, and then circle around it in the same manner in which he would circle around the Sacred House. The Arabs called these stones baetyls (ansab). Whenever these stones resembled a living form they called then’ idols (asnam) and images (awthan). The act of circumambulating them they called circumrotation (dawar).
Whenever a traveler stopped at a place or station in order to rest or spend the night, he would select for himself four stones, pick out the finest among them and adopt it as his god, and use the remaining three as supports for his cooking-pot. On his departure he would leave them behind, and would do the same on his other stops. The Arabs were wont to offer sacrifices before all these idols, baetyls, and stones. Nevertheless they were aware of the excellence and superiority of the Ka’bah, to which they went on pilgrimage and visitation. What they did on their travels was a perpetuation of what they did at the Ka’bah, because of their devotion to it. The sheep which they offered and slaughtered before their (34 idols and baetyls were called sacrifices (ata’ir, sing. atirah); the place on which they slaughtered and offered the sacrifice was called an altar, (‘itr). In this connection Zuhayr ibn-abi-Sulma said: “He moved therefrom and reached a mountain top, Like a high altar sprinkled with the blood of sacrifice.” The banu-Mulayh of the Khuza’ah [tribe] (they are the kindreds of Talhat a-Talahat [or al-Talhat]) were wont to worship the jinn. In reference to them the following verse was revealed: “Truly they worship ye call on besides God, are, like yourselves, his servants.”
According to Islamic Theologians (Mullahs, Maulana, Moulavis, etc.), or Islamic teachings— Allah is the supreme God or creator who, in the manner of a revealed God acting in history, talked or introduced Himself with Prophet Mohammed through an Angel named Gabriel, disclosing the truth that it is the Allah who created everything in the universe, right from the time when Gabriel disclosed the ‘truth’ to Mohammed in the mountain cave of Hira Parvat and gave Mohammed the Koran. They believe that before this truth was revealed—pagan Arabs were in the total darkness (Andhakar Zuug) and they used to worship various puppet goddess and that the pagans were very evil people.
Moreover, the allegation by some historians and Islamists, such as Montgomery Watt, that the Meccan Quraysh lacked compassion for the poor or were a disintegrating society are without substance. The indications are, rather, that they remained economically buoyant and that social inequality did not lead to the disintegration of pre-Islamic society in favor of the umma. Furthermore the Muslim-inspired notion that the Arabs were originally monotheists of Abraham’s religion, who later degenerated into polytheistic paganism, and hence that the Ka’aba is the ordained house of God, has no historical, or archaeological basis. Rather, the patriarchs worshipped El at stone bethels just as the pre-Islamic Arabians. The most ancient of all these idols was Manah. The Arabs used to name their children ‘Abd-Manah and Zayd-Manah. Manah was erected on the seashore in the vicinity of al-Mushallal in Qudayd, between Medina and Mecca. All the Arabs used to venerate her and sacrifice before her. In particular, the Aws and the Khazraj, as well as the inhabitants of Medina and Mecca and their vicinities, used to venerate Manah, sacrifice before her, and bring unto her their offerings. The Aws and the Khazraj, as well as those Arabs among the people of Yathrib and other places who took to their way of life, were wont to go on pilgrimage and observe the vigil at all the appointed places, but not shave their heads. At the end of the pilgrimage, however, when they were about to return home, they would set out to the place where Manah stood, shave their heads, and stay there a while. They did not consider their pilgrimage completed until they visited Manah. Because of this veneration of Manah by the Awa and the Khazraj, ‘Abd-al-’Uzza ibn-Wadi’ah al-Muzani, or some other Arab, said: “An oath, truthful and just, I swore By Manah, at the sacred place of the Khazraj.”
The Quraysh as well as the rest of the Arabs continued to venerate Manah until Mohammed (the Apostle of God) set out from Medina in the eighth year of the Hijrah, the year in which God accorded him the victory. When he was at a distance of four or five nights from Medina, he dispatched ‘Ali to destroy her. ‘Ali demolished her, took away all her treasures and carried them back to the Prophet. They then adopted Allat as their goddess. Allat stood in al-Ta’if, and was more recent than Manah. She was a cubic rock beside which a certain Jew used to prepare his barley porridge (sawiq). Her custody was in the hands of the banu-’Attab ibn-Malik of the Thaqif, who had built an edifice over her. The Quraysh, as well as all the Arabs, were wont to venerate Allat. They also used to name their children after her, calling them Zayd-Allat and Taym-Allat. She stood in the place of the left-hand side minaret of the present-day mosque of al-Ta’if.
Allat continued to be venerated until the Thaqif embraced Islam, when Mohammed dispatched al-Mughirah ibn-Shu’bab, who destroyed her and burnt her temple to the ground. Aws ibn-Hajar, swearing by Allat, said: “By Allat and al-’Uzza and those who in them believe, And by Allah, verily He is greater than both.” She is, in point of time, more recent than either Allat or Manah. The Arabs named their children after the latter two before they named them after al-’Uzza. Her idol was situated in a valley in Nakhlat al-Sha’miyah called Hurad, alongside al-Ghumayr’ to the right of the road from Mecca to al-’Iraq. Over her Zilim ibn-As’ad built a house called Buss in which the people used to receive oracular communications. The Arabs as well as the Quraysh were wont to name their children ‘Abd-al-’Uzza. Furthermore al-’Uzza was the greatest idol among the Quraysh. They used to journey to her, offer gifts unto her, and seek her favors through sacrifice.
“Luhayy put Al-Uzza in a Nakhla Taghut. When they had finished their Ka’ba Hajj they circle around Al-Uzza. The Quraysh worshipped her. Manat was worshipped by the Aus and Khazraj in Yathrib.”[xvii] Those who prayed to Al-Uzza and Manat, “shaved their heads and completed all of the rites associated with the Hajj.” “We were in the Prophet’s company in the middle of the lunar month. He looked at the moon and said, ‘You will see your Lord as you see this moon.’”[xviii] We have been told that the Apostle of God once mentioned al-Uzza saying, “I have offered a white sheep to al-’Uzza, while I was a follower of the religion of my people.” And, thereafter, Abu-al-Mundhir said: The Quraysh as well as the other Arabs who inhabited Mecca did not offer to any of the idols anything similar to their veneration of al-’Uzza. The next in order of veneration was Allat and then Manah. The Thaqif, on the other hand, were wont to offer Manah the exclusive honor [of visitation and sacrifice], in the same way the Quraysh offered it to al-’Uzza, while the Aws and the Khazraj favored Manah therewith. All of them, though, venerated al-’Uzza. They did not, however, hold the same regard, or anything approaching it, for the five idols which were introduced by ‘Amr ibn-Luhayy. These are the five idols mentioned in the Koran, “Forsake not Wadd nor Suwa’, nor Yaghuth and Ya’us and Nasr.”
Hubal is an Aramaic word, meaning vapour or spirit. Some opinions favor an association of Hubal with Canaanite god Ba’al. Others liken it to Cybele. Bearing in mind that Q’re was also an Arabian Goddess, the influence of Greece and Anatolia through Nabatea is a natural conclusion. The Quraysh had also several idols in and around the Ka’bah. The greatest of these was Hubal. The first to set it up [for worship] was Khuzaymah ibn-Mudrikah ibn-al-Ya’s’ ibn-Mudar. Consequently it used to be called Khuzaymah’s Hubal. It stood inside the Ka’bah. In front of it were seven divination arrows (sing. qidh, pl. qidah or aqduh). On one of these arrows was written “pure” (sarih), and on another “consociated alien” (mulsag). Whenever the lineage of a new-born was doubted, they would offer a sacrifice to it [Hubal] and then shuffle the arrows and throw them. If the arrows showed the word “pure,” the child would be declared legitimate and the tribe would accept him. If, however, the arrows showed the words “consociated alien,” the child would be declared illegitimate and the tribe would reject him. The third arrow was for divination concerning the dead, while the fourth was for divination concerning marriage. The purpose of the three remaining arrows has not been explained. Whenever they disagreed concerning something, or purposed to embark upon a journey, or undertake some project, they would proceed to it [Hubal] and shuffle the divination arrows before it. Whatever result they obtained they would follow and do accordingly.
Another tradition[xix] says that the idol Hubal was called Hubal Khuzaima. It was an idol of Banu Kinana. Beside it were laid the ritual arrows of divination. On both sides of it were placed the two gold images of deers. Nearby were standing the imageries of the Prophets Abraham and Ishmael with seven divining arrows in their hands and also the idol of Virgin Mary with the baby Jesus in her affectionate embrace. Year in and year out people, were surging there to worship. Both men and women stepping out of their clothing and, rubbing shoulders with each other made seven rounds of the Ka’ba, fell prostrate before the idols and invoked their blessings and benedictions. After the episode of Abraha, the Quraish priding themselves as the people of the sanctuary imposed many a restriction on others who came to Mecca from outside for worship. The outsiders were neither allowed to bring their food inside the sacred territory nor permitted to go round the Ka’ba wearing their own clothing. The Quraish supplied them clothing but if they had none, they (the outsiders) were asked to go round the Ka’ba naked. The men circle around the Ka’ba completely naked while women were wearing a piece of cloth in front and back and having one hand in front and the other behind. Not satisfied with this numerality of idols and plurality of gods each and every family had established separately an idol in its home as its private deity. Some of them were like blooming girls, some of them were like ferocious lions and some of them were like rapacious vultures and so on. They worshipped them by whistling through their fingers and clapping their hands--the origin of the modern practice in Islam.
When they went out on a journey the last thing they did was rub against their family deity and the same immediately when they returned. They carried with them along with the articles of travel four crude stones, three to form oven and the one to worship. If they were unable to carry four they would take one of the stones used for oven and worship it with great piety and veneration. Men in every walk of life had their idols installed in the Ka’ba. The corn merchants had their idol made of flour. If there was any famine they, greatly irked by its inability to help them in their hour of stress, would break it to pieces and swallow it up. When the pilgrims did not find out any wood to feed their oven in rainy days they would break the wooden idols installed there and use them as, firewood instead to bake their bread and cook their curry.
Another divinatory tradition among the Arabs was the casting of Azlam (i.e. featherless arrows which were of three kinds: one showing ‘yes’, another ‘no’ and a third was blank) which they used to do in case of serious matters like travel, marriage and the like. If the lot showed ‘yes’, they would do, if ‘no’, they would delay for the next year. Other kinds of Azlam were cast for water, blood-money or showed ‘from you’, ‘not from you’, or ‘Mulsaq’ (consociated). In cases of doubt in filiation they would resort to the idol of Hubal, with a hundred-camel gift, for the arrow caster. Only the arrows would then decide the sort of relationship. If the arrow showed (from you), then it was decided that the child belonged to the tribe; if it showed (from others), he would then be regarded as an ally, but if (consociated) appeared, the person would retain his position but with no lineage or alliance contract.[xx] This was very much like gambling and arrow-shafting whereby they used to divide the meat of the camels they slaughtered according to this tradition.
Moreover, they used to have a deep conviction in the tidings of soothsayers, diviners and astrologers. A soothsayer used to traffic in the business of foretelling future events and claim knowledge of private secrets and having jinn subordinates who would communicate the news to him. Some soothsayers claimed that they could uncover the unknown by means of a granted power, while other diviners boasted they could divulge the secrets through a cause-and-effect-inductive process that would lead to detecting a stolen commodity, location of a theft, a stray animal, and the like. The astrologer belonged to a third category who used to observe the stars and calculate their movements and orbits whereby he would foretell the future. Lending credence to this news constituted a clue to their conviction that attached special significance to the movements of particular stars with regard to rainfall.
The belief in signs, as betokening future events, was, of course common among the Arabs. Some days and months and particular animals were regarded as ominous. They also believed that the soul of a murdered person would fly in the wilderness and would never be at rest until revenge was taken. Superstition was rampant. Should a deer or bird, when released, turn right then what they embarked on would be regarded auspicious, otherwise they would get pessimistic and withhold from pursuing it. People of the pre-Islamic period practiced devotion to the Holy Sanctuary, circumambulation, observance of pilgrimage, the vigil on ‘Arafah and offering sacrifices. Mulsim authors claim the Quraysh would refrain from going to ‘Arafah with the crowd, instead they would stop short at Muzdalifah. They would not eat dried yogurt or cooked fat, nor would they enter a tent made of camel hair or seek shade unless in a house of adobe bricks, so long as they were committed to the intention of pilgrimage. They also, out of a deeply-rooted misconception, denied pilgrims, other than Meccans, access to the food they had brought when they wanted to make pilgrimage or lesser pilgrimage.
They ordered pilgrims coming from outside Mecca to circle around Al-Ka’bah in Quraysh uniform clothes, but if they could not afford them, men were to do so in a state of nudity, and women with only some piece of cloth to hide their groins. They claimed that Allah says, “O Children of Adam! Take your adornment (by wearing your clean clothes), while praying [and going round (the Tawaf of) the Ka’bah]. If men or women were generous enough to go round Al-Ka’bah in their clothes, they had to discard them after circumambulation for good. It was before [Hubal] that ‘Abd-al-Muttalib shuffled the divination arrows [in order to find out which of his ten children he should sacrifice in fulfillment of a vow he had sworn], and the arrows pointed to his son ‘Abdullah, the father of the Prophet. Mohammed’s father’s name was “Abdullah”. Had there been no “Allah” in pre-Islamic Arab, there could be no Abdullah or slave of Allah in Arabia. When ‘Abd al-Mutallib (Mohammed’s grandfather) is described as having prayed to Allah while consulting Hubal’s arrow, it is simply that the sources balk at depicting the Prophet’s grandfather as a genuine pagan, not that Allah and Hubal were alternative names of the same god.[xxi]
To the Muslim, the religion and history of Abraham belongs to the mythological period before Moses. All the references to Abraham’s God are in the form of El, such as El Shaddai, God of the Mountain sometimes also referred to as the Almighty in the heavens suggesting an astral deity, and the rituals such as dividing the animal sacrifice are of an older kind, consistent with El and the older Semitic deities rather than revealed monotheism. There is thus no valid substance to the claim that the monotheism of Abraham preceded the polytheistic deities of pre-Islamic Arab society or that the Ka’aba was founded by Abraham as the house of the one God. Abraham is said in the Christian Bible to have made a journey from Ur of the Chaldees to Harran. These were the Southern and Northern centers of worship of the ancient Moon God, Nannar or Sin. When Sir Leonard Woolley[xxii] excavated the Royal Tombs at Ur, he was surprised to find a ‘ram in a thicket’ echoing Abraham’s sacrificial offer of Isaac and the ‘scapegoat’. Many of Abraham’s relatives and ancestors lived in the vicinity of Harran. Several key names in Abraham’s family, Terah (compare Yerah Moon God of Canaan), Laban, Sarah and Milcah are all derived from worship of the Moon Deity.[xxiii] The deification of Ab-ram in the earliest documents is a synonym for Ab-Sin.
Benjaminites were nomads on the outskirts of Mari around 1760 BC who had specific associations with Harran[xxiv]. The names Abi-ram (Abraham) Yasmah-El (Ishmael) Yaqob-El (Jacob), a name also shared by a Hyksos chief and El-Laban (Laban) all appear at Mari. The root milk denoting melech (king) or in its sacrificial form, the demon Moloch, is also found. Another word at Mari in this time which will come to have significance in Islam is umma or “mother unit” of the nomadic tribes.[xxv] Jacob’s fourfold blessing is also of ‘the deep’ and ‘the breasts and womb’, hinting at the ancient ‘mother’ as well as the ‘father’ god and El Shaddai of the mountains and heavens: Even by the God of thy father, who shall help thee; and by the Almighty, who shall bless thee with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts, and of the womb.[xxvi]
Associated with this cultural complex is an older form of marriage called the Beena marriage, associated with the matriarchs at the founding of Old Testament myth. The episodes concerning Laban in Genesis, hint at a matrilineal society in which partners are subject to the wife’s family and are expected to do service in dwelling with them for years at a time. The seven years Jacob spent with Laban for each wife indicates the line of Laban was matrilocal and matrilineal in a way which gave power to the brothers of the mother. Moving to the family of the wife is consistent with the injunction in Genesis to “leave your father and mother and cleave unto your wife” and with Jewish marriage practice to go into the wife’s tent. In such a society, child-support is achieved at least partly by immediate relatives of the mother, in which uncles figure prominently thus compensating for their lack of their own paternity uncertainty by a commensurate investment in their sisters’ children with whom they share a significant genetic bond.
Arameans are any people belonging to a confederacy of tribes that migrated from the Arabian Peninsula to the Fertile Crescent in 2000 BC. The Encyclopedia Britannica notes that among them were the biblical matriarchs Leah and Rachel, wives of Jacob. They formed principalities around and including Damascus. Aramaic language and culture spread through international trade, reaching a cultural peak during the 9th–8th centuries BC. Aramaic became the universal language of commerce, culture, and government throughout the fertile crescent and remained so to the time of Yeshua (Joshua) and in some places to the 7th century AD. Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic and Akkadian all have a common origin in Afro-Asiatic. Aramaic script emerged in turn from Phoenician and old Canaanite phonetic. The family tree of the tribes of Israel illustrates a careful attempt to resolve dissonance between matrilineal and patrilineal paradigms, involving cousin or even half-sister marriage. Names like Terah and Laban are associated with the moon god, who presided at both Ur and Harran, the two towns spanning Abraham’s migration (Briffault). Abraham takes both a wife Sarah who gives birth to Isaac, and a slave concubine, Hagar who is sent away with Ishmael. Jacob is also polygymous with two wives and a slave concubine of each given to them by Laban with whom he also sires children in their mistresses stead.
Feminist Nancy Jay, in her book Throughout Your Generations Forever[xxvii], draws attention to the schism between such societies probably originating in Canaanite planter cultures and the patriarchal traditions of shepherding tribes illustrated in Jacob’s departure and many successive biblical invocations against the Queen of Heaven and her ways. The division between these two cultures cuts directly through the Gordian knot of paternity uncertainty discussed earlier. It was Rebecca who ordered Jacob to trick Isaac with a fleece, to steal hairy Esau’s blessing as firstborn: “Upon me be thy curse, my son: only obey my voice, and go fetch me them.” She did so because Esau had ‘married out’, taking two Hittite wives, Judith and Bashemath. It is Rebecca who sends Jacob to Laban: “Now therefore, my son, obey my voice; arise, flee thou to Laban my brother to Haran.” The moment he arrives, a cousin marriage is arranged with Rachel. Having served seven years with the matrilineal kin for the love of Rachel, Laban tricks Jacob into also marrying Leah, because the first-born daughter should proceed the younger in marriage, causing him to tarry another ‘week’ of seven years. When Jacob escapes Laban’s clutches as mother’s brother, to return as he promised to his father’s line, it is Rachel who hides under her menstrual skirts Laban’s stolen teraphim, suggested to be tokens of land and lineage - “Is there yet any portion or inheritance for us in our father’s house?”
Pre-Islam documents that possession of the ‘house gods’ are considered title to estate[xxviii]. This mutual deceit indicates a transfer from matriliny to patriliny in the name of El: And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.[xxix] And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.[xxx] Choosing circumcision (the only thing to which a woman is not capable) to forever, after, ban the argument of matrilyny as the lawful covenant, El/Jehovah/Jaweh establishes the divine, patriarchal plan through Abraham.
Jacob had made his pact with El at Bethel when he erected a standing stone he had slept over, just as the Arabians used three stones for a pot stand and the fourth for God, both rituals uniting Earth and Heaven. Thus too the Ka’aba, as God’s house, stands as a baetyl in the Arabic Bedouin tradition. Moreover, the name Luz which means a ‘place of refuge’ became the central sanctuary for the amphictiony of the twelve tribes of Israel[xxxi]. Notice also that Jacob’s belief in this God is conditional on the deities performance in real life, just as the polytheists of Arabia worshipped the deities for the karmic efficacy: “And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it. And he called the name of that place Bethel: but the name of that city was called Luz at the first. And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, so that I come again to my father’s house in peace; then shall the Lord be my God: And this stone, which I have set for a pillar, shall be God’s house: and of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee.”[xxxii]
Analysis of the transition between matrilineal and patrilineal lines of descent, in which sacrifice, or forgone sacrifice, and the paternal blessing were a way of recognizing the more ephemeral male line of descent through the father to the blessed son. The theme of the ‘barren’ woman in Sarah and Rachel is likewise significant. Endogamy (marriage to a woman of the same patrilineage) insures the offspring’s’ patrilineage membership, even if it is figured through the mother. Close agnatic endogamy (marriage within the patriline) is extremely rare, except in Semitic traditions. In a way reminiscent of the Patriarchs, throughout the Arab world, families have preferred men to marry their father’s brother’s daughters. The descent line of the Patriarchs continued only through endogamy: Isaac and Jacob (but not Ishmael) married endogamously in cousin marriages. Joseph married exogamously but his sons were adopted by Jacob, correcting this, and other, irregularities of their descent”.
Centrally, Abraham’s covenant with God is sexually reproductive: And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee exceeding...And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee...It involves circumcision of the penis as a sacrificial token of male fertility: This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you. Testifying was likewise, for Abraham, swearing by the testis (testis, testicle, witness) and hence the entire Old and New Testaments: “And Abraham said unto his eldest servant of his house...Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh: And I will make thee swear by the Lord, the God of heaven, and the God of the earth, that thou shalt not take a wife unto my son of the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell: But thou shalt go unto my country, and to my kindred, and take a wife unto my son Isaac.”[xxxiii]
The importance of this cultural background? Ishmael (not Isaac) was the seed from Abraham that would be Allah’s chosen people and, therefore, Arab (not Jew) are the favorites of the one, true God.
Muslims claim that the archetypes of Yahweh/Jehovah have their origin in El. He is an original creator god - the ‘Creator of Created things’, which definitely includes fertility, but may also include the creation of Heaven and Earth as with the Mesopotamian Marduk and Tiamat, whose own mythology may be partly derived from the older Canaanite myths. El was the proberbial old man who is both a father and judge. He was a kingly and kindly figure, benevolent but not uninvolved. He was the god of decrees and the father of the reigning king. “It was his responsibility to insure that equilibrium was preserved among all the conflicting and competing powers within it.” He thus was respected by the other Gods - “Your decree El is wise, your wisdom is everlasting.” “It was not for nothing that El was called ‘the kindly and compassionate’ - a design strangely reminiscent of ‘Allah the Merciful, the Compassionate’ in Islam. Not that El was incapable of anger: transgressions in the community … could provoke him - and then he would prompt neighboring powers to invade and conquer. To avert such calamities the king had to perform rites of expiation and offer sacrifices”.
Ashteroth (Asherah)[xxxiv], the Semitic name of the Great Goddess, whose origin differs from Astarte, was “in wisdom the Mistress of the Gods”, called by the Sumerians Ashnan “the strength of all things”, a “kindly and beautiful maiden.” The Canaanites called her “She who gives birth to the Gods” and as the “Lady who traverses the Sea” she is Goddess of both the Sea and Moon. In the Old Testament she is identified with her sacred groves. Although Canaanite mythology varies from city to city, the discovery of extensive records at Ras Shamra of the city of Ugarit, gives us a uniquely detailed view of Canaanite Gods and Goddesses, dating from the author Elimelek around 1370 BC. Kings traditionally ruled as intermediaries of the Gods in maintaining the fertility of the land.
Despite siring the Gods and Goddesses, El and Ashteroth, no longer remain the only key players in the cosmic drama. As with Sumerian and many other mythologies a cosmic struggle for supremacy arises in which mortal combat occurs. This weaves themes both of maintaining the cosmic order against the turbulent waters of chaos and the barren season of death and of combat associated with new deities arising from social and political change. In the Canaanite myth, a new and possibly Akkadian outsider, whose name is Ba’al Haddad or Lord enters the situation in hated competition with Ashteroth and her children by El. He is a young, warlike god of wind and thunderstorms and thus fertility itself. Unlike El, he is not judicious, frequently figuring in situations from which he must be saved. In this respect he displays a significant parallel to Dumuzi (Tammuz) among the Mesopotamians, which will prove to be of significance. He also has the hideous attribute of devouring his own children, consistent with infanticide practices of several Semitic patron gods.[xxxv]
Initially Ba’al and Ashteroth are members of El’s court. Ba’al attacks El by surprise and castrates him, assuming the power of his fertility. In effect, Ba’al becomes the central intermediary of paternal cosmic order...”it is Ba’al’s responsibility to insure El’s benevolent intention is realized”, but he does not replace the primal creative power of El. El, who loves all the Gods, now calls on his children as chaos gods to avenge his displacement. His son Yamm, Lord of the Sea and the mythical ocean of chaos lying beyond the ordered world, terrorizes the gods into giving up Ba’al. But Ba’al refuses and conquers Yamm, Ba’al now emerging as the God who overcomes the waters of chaos.
In her role of Goddess of War and Death, Ashteroth’s lust for blood is unbounded: “Ashteroth kills the people living in valleys, in cities and on the seashore and in the land of sunrise, until the cut off heads of soldiers were reaching to her belt and she was wading up to her waist in blood. Violently she smites and gloats, Ashteroth cuts them down and gazes; her liver exalts in mirth … for she plunges her knees in the blood of soldiers, her loins in the gore of warriors, till she has had her fill of slaughtering in the house, of cleaving among the tables.” After which, she, the Progenetress of Nations washed her hands of the blood of the slain, in dew and rain supplied by her brother Ba’al.” “Ashteroth was fertilized by the blood of men, rather than semen, because her worship dated all the way back to the Neolithic, when fatherhood was unknown and blood was considered the only substance which could transmit life. Hecatombs of 100 men seem to have been sacrificed to Ashteroth when her image was reddened with rouge and henna for the occasion. Like the Lady of the Serpent Skirt, Ashteroth hung the shorn penises of her victims on her goatskin apron or aegis.” “Ashteroth’s capacity to curse and kill made even the Heavenly Father afraid of her. When El seemed reluctant to do her bidding, she threatened to smash his head and cover his gray hair and beard with gore. He hastily gave her everything she asked, saying ‘Whoever hinders thee will be crushed’”.
In the mythical cycle, “Mot too is [now] revived and once again challenges Ba’al to single combat. In the midst of the fighting, however, the sun-goddess, Spsi (Shapash), intervenes, advising Mot that no further combat is needed because El is now on the side of Ba’al. El, always patriarchal and judicious, has discerned that Ba’al in his defeat and resurrection has manifested a new form of order; as a patriarchal deity El must uphold this new order. The decree is made that Ba’al will rule during the seasons of fertility and Mot during the seasons of sterility and drought.” There are many implications of this mythical cycle that underlie the events of the Bible and overshadow and cast the die for the Christian heritage:[xxxvi]
Ashteroth annually cast her death-curse anathema on the Canaanite god, fulfilling Mot’s slaying of Ba’al and his destruction in turn by her. Mot stood for the barren season that slew its own fertile twin Aleyin, the son of Ba’al. “In typical sacred-king style Mot-Aleyin was the son of the virgin Ashteroth and also the bridegroom of his own mother. Like Jesus the Lamb of God, Aleyin said ‘I am the lamb which is made ready with pure wheat to be sacrificed in expiation.’”. “After Aleyin’s death, Ashteroth resurrects him and sacrifices Mot, telling him he has been forsaken by his heavenly father El.” A bastardization of the crucifixion of Christ when Jesus cried “Eloi Eloi lama sabaschthani’ - El El why hast thou forsaken me?...and some said ‘Behold he calleth for Elias’ and one ran and filled a sponge with vinegar and put it on a reed and gave it to him to drink saying, ‘Let alone; let us see whether Elias will come to take him down’. And Jesus cried with a loud voice and gave up the ghost.”[xxxvii]
This “sacred” drama included a moment when Ashteroth broke Mot’s reed scepter, to signify his castration, again imitating a detail of the Christian Gospels. Of course, the god-killing Ashteroth was rightly diabolized in patriarchal legends. Abyssinian Christians called her Aynat “the evil eye of earth”. They said she was an old witch destroyed by Jesus, who commanded that she must be burned and her ashes scattered on the wind. St. Paul’s excommunication curse “If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maran-atha derives from the more ancient curse of Ashteroth: Ana-tithenai: to set up, dedicate [a curse], maranatha: Our Lord [bridegroom], come.”
Another pertinent deity, because of his relationship to Sin, or Nannar, the God of Abraham is Yarikh the moon god. ‘The illuminator of myriads (of stars)’, ‘lamp of heaven’, possibly also the crescent moon and ‘lord of the sycle’ and thereby the father of the Kotharat. He is patron of the city Qart-Abilim. Like Sin, he is a dedicated courtier. After sunset he embraces Nikkal-and-Ib (Ningal) and becomes determined to marry her. He refuses the daughters of Ba’al and presents a lavish brideprice to Nikkal-and-Ib’s family and the two are wed. Ba’al-Hadad’s creatures devour his handmaidens, so he sends them to El. El tells them to go into the wilderness and there birth horned buffalo, which will distract Ba’al-Hadad. Nikkal-and-Ib ‘great lady and clear/bright/fruit’ or ‘Great goddess of fruit’. She is possibly the daughter of Dagon of Tuttul, or else of Khirkhib. She is romanced by Yarikh and marries him after Yarikh arranges a brideprice with Khirkhib and pays it to her parents.
Kotharat (was thought to be Kathirat) ‘skillful’. They are a group of goddesses associated with conception and childbirth. ‘…The swallow-like daughters of the crescent moon.’ They are also associated with the new moon. They attend Daniel for seven days to aid in the conception of Aqhat and receive his sacrifice.
From the 4th century AD, Catholic Bishops made notable conversions of the Kings of Himyar, Aksum and of Ethiopia. Narjan, an ancient pagan pilgrimage spot in a fertile valley on the trade route became a Christian stronghold, Medina became a center of Jewish influence. And, ultimately, both Christianity and Judaism entered into competition in Arabia, encouraged by the Persians. In 522, King Dhu Nawas Yusaf “Lord of Curls” became the last elected Himyar king, descendent of a Jewish hero, who made war on the Christians. He offered the citizens of Naryan the choice of Jewry or death. When they refused he burned them all in a great trench. Afterwards Narjan was named “the trench”. In response the Ethiopians overcame them and Abraham made San’a a Christian pilgrimage point which rivaled Mecca. This led to an expeditionary force of Christians to try to destroy the Ka’aba. In turn Persia invaded and for a short time the country became a Persian satrapy. This confused situation laid the seeds for the emergence of Islam.
Mohammed left Mecca under a cloud, because the Meccans remained faithful to al-Uzza and their iconic deities and rejected his exclusive monotheism which branded their deities false icons, but his brand of Abrahamic monotheism struck a stronger chord in Medina and, although he was derided by the Jews there for his religion, and turned from bowing to Jerusalem to Mecca as the nexus of God’s dwelling (even in spite of the genocide of the Jewish men after the siege of Medina), it was the greater attraction of monotheism in the environment of Medina which made the growth of Islam possible. Historian Patricia Crone (1987) has pointed out that Mohammed, in combining the monotheism which had already found a natural ground swell in Medina with a strong strategic emphasis on tribal law guaranteed the sweeping popularity of the religion. This however means that large sections of the Koran and Sharia are simply recitations of tribal law of the 6th-9th century AD and not the revealed word of Allah.
Moreover recent finds of old Koranic writings in Yemen[xxxviii] with overlaid redactions confirm that like the Bible, the Koran is a collection of anecdotal sayings later compiled into a canonical version and not a text revealed in one clear rendition by God. Gerd Puin who has researched these, comments: “My idea is that the Koran is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even at the time of Mohammed. Many of them may even be a hundred years older than Islam itself. Even within the Islamic traditions there is a huge body of contradictory information, including a significant Christian substrate; one can derive a whole Islamic anti-history from them if one wants. The Koran claims for itself that it is ‘mubeen,’ or clear, but if you look at it, you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply doesn’t make sense. Many Muslims will tell you otherwise, of course, but the fact is that a fifth of the Koranic text is just incomprehensible. This is what has caused the traditional anxiety regarding translation. If the Koran is not comprehensible, if it can’t even be understood in Arabic, then it’s not translatable into any language. That is why Muslims are afraid. Since the Koran claims repeatedly to be clear but is not—there is an obvious and serious contradiction. Something else must be going on.”
Other Islamic commentaries on this phase of Arab history document that the migration of the Jews from Palestine to Arabia passed through two phases: first, as a result of the pressure to which they were exposed, the destruction of the their temple, and taking most of them as captives to Babylon, at the hand of the King Bukhtanassar. In the year 587 BC, some Jews left Palestine for Hijaz and settled in the northern areas whereof. The second phase started with the Roman occupation of Palestine in 70 A.D. This resulted in a tidal wave of Jewish migration into Hijaz, and Yathrib, Khaibar and Taima’, in particular. Here, they made proselytes of several tribes, built forts and castles, and lived in villages. Judaism managed to play an important role in the pre-Islam political life. When Islam dawned on that land, there had already been several famous Jewish tribes — Khabeer, Al-Mustaliq, An-Nadeer, Quraizah and Qainuqa’. In some versions, the Jewish tribes counted as many as twenty.
Christianity had first made its appearance in Arabia following the entry of the Abyssinian (Ethiopian) and Roman colonists into that country. The Abyssinian (Ethiopian) colonization forces in league with Christian missions entered Yemen as a retaliatory reaction for the iniquities of Dhu Nawas, and started vehemently to propagate their faith ardently. They even built a church and called it Yemeni Al-Ka’bah with the aim of directing the Arab pilgrimage caravans towards Yemen, and then made an attempt to demolish the Sacred House in Mecca. Allah, the Almighty, however did punish them and made an example of them – here and hereafter.[xxxix]
MOHAMMED (Arab. “the Praised”), the name taken at a later period by the founder of Islam. He was originally called Halabi. He was born about the year 570, A.D., at Mecca, and was the son of Abdallah, of the family of Hashini; and of Amina, of the family of Zuhra, both of the powerful tribe of Koreish, but of a side branch only, and therefore of little or no importance. His father, a poor merchant, died either before or shortly after Mohammed’s birth. When six years old he also lost his mother. His grandfather, Abd-Al-Mutallib, adopted the boy; and when, two years later, he too died, Mohammed’s uncle, Abu Talib, though poor himself, took him into his house, and remained his best friend and protector throughout his whole life. The accounts which have survived of the time of his youth are of too legendary a nature to deserve credit; certain, however, it seems to be, that he at first gained a scanty livelihood by tending the flocks of the Meccans, and that he once or twice accompanied his uncle on his journeys to Southern Arabia and Syria.
In his 25th year, Mohammed entered the service of a rich widow named Khadija (Chadjda), likewise descended from the Koreish, and accompanied her caravans to the fairs. Up to that time, his circumstances were poor. Suddenly his fortune changed. The wealthy, but much older, and twice widowed, Khadija offered him her hand which he accepted. Mohammed continued his merchant trade at Mecca, but without much energy, spending most of his time in solitary contemplation. He was 40 years of age when he is said to have received the first divine communication in the solitude of the mountain Hira, near Mecca. He said that Gabriel appeared to him, and in the name of God commanded him to “read” - that is, to preach the true religion, and to spread it abroad by committing it to writing. The writings are contained in the “Koran.” Waraka, one of his wife’s relatives, who had embraced Judaism, spoke to him of the Jewish doctrine, and told him the story of the patriarchs of Israel.
The fundamental doctrine of the Koran is contained in the two articles of belief: “There is no God but Allah; and Mohammed is his prophet.” The Islamic doctrine of God’s nature and attributes coincides with the Christian, insofar as he is by both taught to be the Creator of all things in heaven and earth, who rules and preserves all things, without beginning, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, and full of mercy. But it differs in that Jesus is only a prophet and apostle, although his birth is said to be due to a miraculous, divine operation.
Mohammed’s first revelation he communicated to no one it would appear, except to Khadija, his daughters, his stepson Ali, his favorite slave Zaid, and to his friend, the prudent and honest Abu Beker. In the fourth year of his mission, however, he made forty proselytes, chiefly slaves and people from the lower ranks; and now some verses were revealed to him, commanding him to come forward publicly as a preacher, and to defy the scorn of the unbelievers. The Meccans did not object to his doings; they considered him a common poet or soothsayer, who, moreover, was not in his right senses, or simply a liar. Gradually, however, as the number of his converts increased, they began to pay more and more attention to his proceedings; and finally, fearing mostly for the sacredness of Mecca, which the new doctrine might abolish, thus depriving them of their chief glory, and the ample revenues of the pilgrimages, they rose in fierce opposition against the new prophet and his adherents who dared “to call their ancient gods idols, and their ancestors fools.”
At last it became necessary that he should be put beyond the reach of his persecutors, and Abu Talib hid him in a fortified castle of his own in the country. Mohammed now conceived the plan to seek refuge in the friendly city of Medina, and about 622 AD (10, 13, or 15 years, according to the different traditions, after his first assuming the sacred office) he fled thither, about one hundred families of his faithful having preceded him some time before, accompanied by Abu Bekr, and reached, not without danger, the town, called the “City of the Prophet” by way of eminence; and from this flight or rather from the next month of the Arabic year, dates the Muslim Era (Hegira).
Towards the close of the 10th year of the Hegira he undertook, at the head of at least 40,000 Muslims, his last solemn pilgrimage to Mecca, and there (on the Mount Arafat[xli]) instructed them in all the important laws and ordinances, chiefly of the pilgrimage; and the ceremonies observed by him on that occasion were fixed for all time. He again solemnly exhorted his believers to righteousness and piety, and chiefly recommended them to protect the weak, the poor, and the women, and to abstain from usury.
Returned from Mecca, he occupied himself again with the carrying out of his expedition against Syria, but fell dangerously ill very soon after his return, and died about noon of Monday the 12th of the third month, in the year 11 of the Hegira (June 8, 632 AD).
What happened in the cave between Mohammed and the spiritual entity who appeared to him circa 610 AD? On a day towards the end of the month of Ramadan, the “prophet” set off for the hills, and spent his time fasting and praying in his usual place. The Muslim tells us, in one version of the myth, that he was so involved with his thoughts, he did not notice the time passing. At the darkest time of the night, just before the dawn, he heard a voice. The voice grew louder and louder, it seemed to come from all directions. It filled the cave where he was sitting, but it also came from somewhere outside in the night - and from inside Mohammed himself. Suddenly, before him was an entity holding a cloth of green brocade bearing the legend embroidered on it. “Read,” said the spirit. “I cannot read!” The spirit “squeezed” Mohammed, “Read!” “I cannot read” Mohammed whined louder. The creature squeezed him tighter, “Read!” “I cannot read?” “Read” said the entity, “in the name of thy Lord who created man from a clot of blood: read in the name of the Almighty God who taught man the use of the pen and taught him what he knew not before!” Allegedly, Mohammed recited the verse and knew it perfectly, word for word, and, the spirit was gone.
Suddenly Mohammed felt worried. He began to panic. Was the cave haunted? Was he ill? Trembling, he stood up, left the cave, and began to walk, shakily, down the mountain path. He was very confused. And, here the story of the prophet changes radically. The Muslim would have you believe that the same voice, called to him, “Oh Mohammed! Truly you are the messenger of God. And I am his angel, Gabriel.” Looking up the Muslim intones that Mohammed saw the angel again, like a human, but so enormous that his two feet straddled the horizon. Mohammed returned to his home in Mecca awe-struck that he had been contacted by the Archangel of the Jews.
Some believe that Mohammed’s revelation was actually demonic. In fact, this was not Mohammed’s first contact with the supernatural. In fact, when he was a child, he was nursed by a Bedouin woman and “two men in white raiment” appeared[xliii], “...two men in white clothes came to me with a golden basin full of snow. They took me and split open my body, then they took my heart and split it open and took out from it a black clot which they flung away. Then they washed my heart and my body with that snow until they made them pure.” In fact, this event so deeply disturbed the Bedouins that they returned Mohammed to his mother when the infant’s wet-nurse stated that, “His [Mohammed’s friend’s] father said to me, ‘I am afraid that this child has had a stroke, so take him back to his family before the result appears...She [Mohammed’s mother] asked me what happened and gave me no peace until I told her. When she asked if I feared a demon had possessed him, I replied that I did.’”[xliv]
Thus, Mohammed’s experience in the cave, his call to “prophethood”, becomes just another step in that same direction. Muslim scholars[xlv] claim that “the commencement of the divine inspiration to Allah’s new Apostle was in the form of good righteous (true) dreams in his sleep. He never had a dream but that it came true like bright day light. He used to go in seclusion, to the cave of Hira, where he communed with Allah alone, continuously, for many days and nights. He used to take with him the journey food for that stay and, then, come back to his wife Khadija to take his food like-wise again for another period to stay. Until, suddenly, the Truth descended upon him while he was in the cave of Hira. The angel came to him in it and asked him to read. The Prophet replied, “I do not know how to read.” The Prophet added, “The angel caught me forcefully and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it anymore. He then released me and again asked me to read, and I replied, “I do not know how to read,” whereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time till I could not bear it anymore. He then released me and asked me again to read, but again I replied, “I do not know how to read or, what shall I read?.” Thereupon he caught me for the third time and pressed me and then released me and said, “Read: In the Name of your Lord, Who has created all that exists. Has created man from a clot. Read and Your Lord is Most Generous up to that which he knew not.”
The Hadith of Bukhari then notes that the Apostle returned with the Inspiration, his neck muscles twitching with terror until he entered upon Khadija and said, “Cover me! Cover me!” They covered him until his fear was over and then he said, “O Khadija, what is wrong with me?” Then he told her everything that had happened and said, ‘I fear that something may happen to me.” Khadija said, ‘Never! But have the glad tidings, for by Allah, Allah will never disgrace you as you keep good relations with your Kith and kin, speak the truth, help the poor and the destitute, serve your guest generously and assist the deserving, calamity-afflicted ones.”
But after a few days Waraqa died and the Divine Inspiration was also paused for a while and the Prophet became so sad as we have heard that he intended several times to throw himself from the tops of high mountains and every time he went up the top of a mountain in order to throw himself down, Gabriel would appear before him and say, “O Mohammed! You are indeed Allah’s Apostle in truth” whereupon his heart would become quiet and he would calm down and would return home. And whenever the period of the coming of the inspiration used to become long, he would do as before, but when he used to reach the top of a mountain, Gabriel would appear before him and say to him what he had said before. (Ibn ‘Abbas said regarding the meaning of: “He it is that Cleaves the daybreak from the darkness”; that Al-Asbah means the light of the sun during the day and the light of the moon at night.
So, there are a number of slight variations to this story, related by different people, describing Mohammed’s visitation by a spirit identifying himself as the angel Gabriel. These stories do not always agree with each other in perfect detail, but on the whole a composite picture can be drawn of Mohammed’s initial experience with the spirit and his subsequent reactions. Here are additional details from Guillaume’s The Life of Mohammed, “So I [Mohammed] read it, and he [Gabriel] departed from me. And I awoke from my sleep, and it was though these words were written on my heart. (Tabari: Now none of God’s creatures was more hateful to me than an (ecstatic) poet or a man possessed: I could not even look at them. I thought, Woe is me poet or possessed - Never shall Quraysh say this of me! I will go to the top of the mountain and throw myself down that I may kill myself and gain rest. So I went forth to do so and then) when I was midway on the mountain, I heard a voice from heaven saying “O Mohammed! thou are the apostle of God and I am Gabriel.”[xlvi] Again, the fundamental issue is that Mohammed was illiterate so, allegory (interpretation) of these events becomes necessary and, that always leads to personal agendas as stated below.
Muslims claim that these visitations from the spirit continued. Then, they stopped for a time believed to have been 6 months to 3 years. When this happened, “The inspiration ceased to come to the messenger of God for a while, and he was deeply grieved. He began to go to the tops of mountain crags, in order to fling himself from them; but every time he reached the summit of a mountain, Gabriel appeared to him and said to him, “You are the Prophet of God.” Thereupon, his anxiety would subside and he would come back to himself.[xlvii] The pre-Islamic Arabs believed in the demon of poetry, and they thought that a great poet was directly inspired by demons.[xlviii] Thus, Mohammed (himself) believed that he was either demon possessed, or influenced by demons, and was suicidal from these visions.[xlix] And, even in the Koran, there are references that other people believed that Mohammed was possessed or influenced by demons:[l] (1) “No, your compatriot Mohammed is not mad. He saw him (Gabriel) on the clear horizon. He does not grudge the secrets of the unseen, nor is this the utterance of an accursed devil.”; (2) “It (the Koran) is no poet’s speech. Scant is your faith! It is no soothsayer’s divination: how little you reflect! It is revelation from the Lord of the Universe.” In the latter, comment, Mohammed is saying to his critics that he really saw an angel, and his words are not from a devil, or from his own imagination. It is obvious that his contemporary critics believed, at least, that he was inspired by a demon, so Mohammed is answering these charges in a form of self-defense.
Regardless, the simple, clean version which has been disseminated for public consumption in the United States actually raises more questions than it allays. Thus, it is of great importance to identify the spirit who squeezed Mohammed at the cave of Hira. The reality is that after his encounter with the spirit, Mohammed was actually afraid that what happened to him was from a Jinni (not Major Nelson’s friendly Genie but, a demon from Arab, pagan lore). It was only after discussing the matter with his wife and friends that he later declared in the Koran that the spirit who squeezed him was the angel Gabriel.[li] And, that raises some other, peculiar discrepancies.
The foregoing, official claims in the Koran (and its commentaries) create serious problems both with its Jewish connection from which, as described above, the Muslim borrows heavily; and, the ignorant who opine that Allah, the Jewish Yahweh and the Catholic Holy Trinity are one and the same. Recall that the Muslim believes one simple thing--Abraham was the father of both the Jew and the Muslim. In essence, the Jew stole the true story of the “chosen people” from the Arab. It was Ishmael (the father of the Arab and Muslim) who was cast-out at the urging of Sara (Abraham’s wife) with Ishmael’s mother, the Egyptian concubine Hagar. And, of course, Abraham, who had impregnated Hagar, at the urging of Sara when (presumably) Gabriel appeared to Abraham and announced that he would (in his 90’s) father a child with Sara (also in her 90’s and barren) to be the father of the “chosen people”. It was Sara’s unbelief in Gabriel’s message and Abraham’s failure to obey that caused the birth of rival stepsons who would forever bear enmity towards each other.[lii]
In fact, it can be argued that much of the Old Testament is concerned with the story of enmity between these two families of Abraham. And, it is the commentaries that (paraphrasing) “I will take the children of Israel from among the nations...and will bring them to their own land; and I will make them one nation in the land, upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king over them all”[liii]; “To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the river Euphrates”[liv]; “I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle… Then the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations”[lv]; “Out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem”[lvi]; “In that day there will be a highway from Egypt and Assyria...in that day Israel will be a third with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing in the midst of the earth”[lvii]; which give rise to the argument that Israel and the Arab world will never know peace.
Regardless, Mohammed’s experience with his Gabriel is radically different from other accounts inextricably connected between the Koran and Old Testament. Recall that in Jewish lore, and Old Testament recordings, Moses dictates that the Archangel Gabriel (“God Speaks”, “Hero of God”, or “Messenger of God”) was one of the four, mighty Archangels who (although lesser in status that the Cherubim and Seraphim) control the four directions of the wind and the natural world and carry-out specific tasks for the Hebrew Yahweh and the Catholic (Christian) Trinity in this corporeal world. In fact, only two Archangels Michael (Captain of the Heavenly Host) and Gabriel (God’s messenger) are actually named in the Bible. And, of the two, Gabriel is the most prolific visitor appearing to many people before his alleged visit to Mohammed in the cave outside Mecca thousands of years later. And, each time that Gabriel did appear in Jewish and Christian lore, the first thing He did was to allay that person’s fear and calm them. Gabriel appeared to the prophet Daniel. Daniel was afraid but Gabriel touched him, he did not squeeze him, he only touched him.[lviii] Gabriel appeared to Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist (called Yihia in the Koran), He identified Himself and said to Zacharias, “Do not be afraid, Zacharias... I am Gabriel that stand in the presence of God.”[lix] Gabriel appeared to the blessed virgin Mary and, she was greatly troubled but Gabriel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary”.[lx] Yet, in the cave, that spirit squeezed Mohammed leaving him terrified and in great fear of death.
Simply put, Mohammed’s experience with his “angel” is totally incompatible with others who have had the same contact with any type of Angel: (1) Adam in Genesis Chapters 3 & 4; (2) Noah in Genesis Chapter 6; (3) Abraham in Genesis Chapters 12-18; (4) Moses in Exodus Chapters 3-34; (5) King David; (6) Isaiah in Isaiah Chapter 6; (7) the Blessed Virgin Mary in Luke Chapter 2; and (8) the Apostle Paul in Acts Chapter 9. In fact, this author’s review of both the King James and Catholic versions of the Old and New Testament reveals nothing of people in the Bible having an experience with God’s Messengers that resembles Mohammed’s experience at all. Each Jew who experienced this phenomenon can best be described as claiming to be filled with a reverent fear, but never became depressed/suicidal as a result of their experience. These people fellowshipped with their God, walked with Him, spoke with Him, but, none of them ever contemplated suicide. Yet, several times, Mohammed attempted suicide after contact with his god, and each time his “spirit” stopped him. In retaliation to Mohammed’s claims, Christian commentators have stated that, first, as stated above, had the spirit actually been Gabriel, the Jewish Pentateuch (the first 5 books of the Old Testament) tells us that he would have calmed Mohammed and relieved his fear. But Mohammed’s spirit left him in extreme distress.
Second, Mohammed’s Gabriel, contradicted his former revelations, over the preceding six hundred years, when the self-same Gabriel said to the blessed Virgin Mary, when he appeared to her, “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called Son of God”.[lxi] But, the spirit who appeared to Mohammed said to him, “...and the Christians say that The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved (infidels) of old. Allah (personally) fighteth against them. How perverse are they.[lxii] Gabriel said to the Blessed Virgin that Jesus would be called the “Son of God”. The spirit who gave the revelations to Mohammed said that this is the saying of the infidels, and declares that Allah Himself fights against the Christians who confess that Jesus is the Son of God. Ignoring the religious overtones of the instant discussion, i.e., Islam vs. Christianity as the one, true religion; the issue is simply one of credibility. For over 10,000 years, both Christian and Muslim agree that Gabriel, heralded the coming of a Messiah. However, Mohammed’s mentor Gabriel revokes that prior testimony and announces, only to Mohammed, that these prior pronouncements were simply wrong.
Third, had the spirit actually been Gabriel, critics argue that Khadija (Mohammed’s wife) would have instantly believed Mohammed’s testimony and would not have tested the spirit the way she did. Or, something less pornographic or immodest would have been used as a litmus test for Gabriel’s identification. Yet, we are told by Ibn Hesham (circa 833 AD), the author of Mohammed’s biography, that Khadija tested the spirit who squeezed Mohammed. She said to Mohammed, “Would you please tell me when the spirit comes to you?” When Mohammed told her, Khadija said “Mohammed, sit on my left thigh.” Mohammed sat on her left thigh and she asked, “Do you see the spirit?”. “Yes.” “Then sit on my right thigh.” Mohammed sat on her right thigh. “Do you see the spirit?” He answered, “Yes.” “Then sit on my lap.” Mohammed sat on her lap and she asked, “Do you see the spirit?” “Yes”. Khadija unveiled, and exposed, her body inquiring, “Do you see the spirit?” “No,” he answered. Then Khadija said, “That spirit is good because he doesn’t want to see my feminine part. You are the prophet of Allah.” And, by that, Mohammed came to be convinced that spirit who was talking to him was the angel Gabriel, and a good spirit, because when he saw his wife almost naked, he didn’t stay to see the uncovered a feminine part of her body while Mohammed was sitting on her lap.[lxiii]
Fourth, critics question why Mohammed’s spirit gave false revelation to his prophet. The spirit said, “Read, in the name of thy Lord who Createth. Createth man from a (blood) clot”.[lxiv] These words contradict not only other, contemporary religious teaching (man was created from the slime/dust of the earth) but, also, even the Koran’s teaching which states that, “Behold, thy Lord said to the angels, ‘I am about to create man from clay. When I have fashioned him and breathed into him of My spirit, fall ye down in prostration unto him’”.[lxv] The logical inquiry must be, “Should the Koran contradict itself if it is to be the basis for world domination?”
Sixth, Mohammed’s other contacts with evil spirits, magic and angels is also unique. It is claimed[lxx] that magic was worked on Mohammed so that he used to think that he had sexual relations with his wives while he actually had not. Then one day he said, “O ‘Aisha do you know that Allah has instructed me concerning the matter I asked Him about? Two men came to me and one of them sat near my head and the other sat near my feet. The one near my head asked the other, “What is wrong with this man?” The latter replied, “He is under the effect of magic.” The first one asked, “Who has worked magic on him?” The other replied, “Labid bin Al-A’sam, a man from Bani Zuraiq who was an ally of the Jews and was a hypocrite.” The first one asked, “What material did he use?” The other replied, “A comb and the hair stuck to it.” The first one asked, “Where is that?” The other replied, “In a skin of pollen of a male date palm tree kept under a stone in the well of Dharwan.” So, the Prophet went to that well and took out those things and said, “That was the well which was shown to me (in a dream). Its water looked like the infusion of Henna leaves and its date-palm trees looked like the heads of devils.” The Prophet added, “Then that thing was taken out.” I said to the Prophet, “Why do you not treat yourself with Nashra?” He said, “Allah has cured me; I dislike to let evil spread among my people.”
This Tradition is also found in other interpretations and commentaries on the Koran.[lxxi] Muslim expert Alfred Guillaume notes that a Muslim scholar says that the spell lasted for a year. In other words, for one year, Mohammed thought that he was having sexual relations with his wives when he was not. The dichotomy for the Muslim is clear, i.e., if Mohammed is supposed to be God’s greatest and last prophet, he only receiving the divine revelations from Allah, how is the prophet so bewitched and befuddled that for one year he thought he was having sexual relations with his wives, when he actually was not. “The apostle of Allah fell ill. He was bewitched about women and food...There were eleven knots [in the hair from the comb]. The two Surahs no. 113, and 114 were revealed to him. No sooner did the apostle of Allah recite a verse than a knot loosened. When all of them were loosened, he regained his urge for food and women.”[lxxii] Exactly the opposite of Samson’s experience with Delilah, where, his hair only pertained to his physical prowess not his ability to discern the mind of God.
Seventh, Mohammed’s experience with Satan is also unique. At one point in time, Mohammed admitted that Satan put words in his mouth to actually compromise with the rampant idol worship of the time. Later, Mohammed claimed that Allah showed him he was wrong, and the Koran’s recital was actually changed. The quote from The Life of Mohammed reads as follows:
Eleventh, one particular claim by Mohammed that Gabriel was responsible for the massacre and enslavement of a Jewish tribe also caused even other Muslims to take pause. Mohammed claimed that Gabriel urged him to go and attack the Jews of Bani Quraiza. This action ended with about 800 prisoners of war being massacred, and thousands of Jewish women and children being enslaved by Mohammed. Islam proclaims, “When the Prophet returned from the (battle) of Al-Khandaq (i.e. Trench) and laid down his arms and took a bath Gabriel came to him while he (i.e. Gabriel) was shaking the dust off his head, and said, ‘You have laid down the arms?’ By Allah, I have not laid them down. Go out to them (to attack them).’ The Prophet said, ‘Where?’ Gabriel pointed towards Bani Quraiza. So Allah’s Apostle went to them (i.e. Banu Quraiza) (i.e. besieged them). They then surrendered to the Prophet’s judgment but he directed them to Sad to give his verdict concerning them. Sad said, ‘I give my judgment that their warriors should be killed, their women and children should be taken as captives, and their properties distributed.’”[lxxix]
In response to this story, Mohammed argued that, “According to what al-Zuhri told me, at the time of the noon prayers Gabriel came to the apostle wearing an embroidered turban and riding on a mule with a saddle covered with a piece of brocade. ..... The apostle passed by a number of his companions in al-Saurayn before he got to the B. Qurayza and asked if anyone had passed them. They replied that Dihya b. Khalifa al-Kalbi had passed upon a white mule with a saddle covered with a piece of brocade. He said, “That was Gabriel who has been sent to B. Qurayza to shake their castles and strike terror to their hearts.”[lxxx] So, Mohammed’s cohorts believed Gabriel to either simply be a fellow traveler or were simply misinformed.
Twelfth, contrary to the mythology of Angels, i.e., they were infallible agents of Allah, Gabriel could not heal his prophet either. Gabriel prayed for Mohammed to be healed, but Mohammed wasn’t healed. The apostle of Allah fell ill and he i.e. Gabriel, chanted on him, saying, “In the name of Allah I chant on to ward off from you every thing that harms you and (to ward off you) against every envier and from every evil eye and Allah will heal you.” The prayer went unanswered[lxxxi]
Finally, the issue of “free will” enters into any analysis of Islam. An illiterate, pedophilic[lxxxii], murderous, suicidal merchant is selected by Islam’s Gabriel as the Muslim prophet to violently overthrow the infidel (by divine fiat) and impose Islam on all the corporeal world. At no time does Gabriel enlighten Mohammed as to perfecting his character or, any other means to this end. The Pentateuch instructs us that “Abraham believed, and his believing was counted for righteousness.”[lxxxiii] Belief is an act of Free Will. And, if it was necessary for the original Father of both the Jew and Muslim to use his free will to “choose” to obey and perfect his nature, then what changed for Islam? Even the Blessed Virgin exhibited the free will of the woman, “And Mary said, ‘Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word.’”[lxxxiv] No squeezing, no violence on the part of the messenger and the voluntary acceptance of that message. Yet, in direct opposition to this mandate, the Islamic Archangel Gabriel swoops down on Mohammed and demands that Mohammed proclaim Islam or he will squeeze the life out of him. The same marching orders of the modern follower of Mohammed--the Muslim.
The next relevant issue in analyzing the status of the Islamic state is its relationship to the rest of the world. We are in a Holy War! A Muslim’s perception of his reality is his reality; our opinion notwithstanding. As demonstrated, quite plainly, those who are pagan (as defined by Mohammed, the prophet, through his Koran) or simply non-religious are infidels. And, in Islam, an adherent to those false doctrines would either be ignorant, an apostate, or an infidel and, deserve mere extermination. And, none of those designations bodes well for the non-Muslim. Ever since early Islam, persecution of indigenous Eastern Coptic Catholics has been continuous and deadly. The remainders, living in predominantly Islamic countries, are quite few--estimated to be 2-3%. Muslim countries, following the Sharia Law, such as Yemen, Hijaz,(North and East of Saudi Arabia), Jordan, Syria, Mesopotamia, Israel, Turkey, North Africa, and Ethiopia, commit these atrocities daily. Recall that, originally, each were inhabited with majority of Christians with a good number of Jews, until the conquest of Islam by Christendom which started around 640 AD. Since, then, the persecution of Christians and Jews has been systematic in these same regions.
Both the Koran and the Hadith (the essential commentaries on Mohammed’s life and the Koran) record that, initially, Mohammed had some good things to say about Catholics, but as time wore on, his attitude towards Christianity darkened. Note that Suras 5 and 9 were some of the last Suras to be spoken by Mohammed and the following quotes are most telling:
Again, as summed up by frontpagemag.com’s 2011 interview with a confidential Muslim spokesman (who has decried the new Muslim Jihad), there is a concise analysis and threat assessment from this Muslim invasion of eastern and western civilization. Particularly, the experience of modern Malaysia is a preview of coming attractions for the United States and Western Europe (where the Muslims have not yet completely taken over). As the spokesman states: As I grew older, I began to notice differences between what I heard the government say or what was taught in school (as Malaysia was Islamicized), and what was really happening in the world, but I learned to keep such thoughts to myself in order to get along. Then 9-11 happened and it turned the world upside down, my own perception of it in particular. I wanted to be surprised that Muslims had carried out mass murder explicitly in the name of Islam, but I wasn’t. Another shock for me was when I found out that the Muslims — jihadists, Al Qaeda members and others — who planned the attacks in New York and Washington had a big planned meeting right here in Kuala Lumpur (the capital and biggest city in Malaysia) in early 2000. And the conspiracy theories about 9-11, the increased appearance of anti-Semitic diatribes in Malaysian bookshops (one tome by Henry Ford is popular here) were things that I simply could not turn a blind eye to anymore. Lastly, Malaysian terrorist Azahari Husin had his hero’s sendoff near Kuala Lumpur in 2005, and about the same time the Malaysian Christian convert Lina Joy was told by this nation’s highest court that she was not allowed to become a Christian, despite the fact that religious freedom is supposedly guaranteed by Malaysia’s constitution. By then, I could no longer hold back my pent-up disgust and outrage at what was happening.
I don’t want your readers to have the impression that I am now, or ever was, a Muslim. While I am not a Muslim, I have indeed been asked to become one, on more than one occasion and with varying degrees of seriousness. ‘Dawah’, or Islamic prosetylization, is never too far away in Malaysia. Deciding that Islam as an ideology (and not Muslims per se) was my enemy was a personal Rubicon for me, a step that, once taken, could never be retracted. I understood how serious this was, from my own studies of Islam, from my knowledge of what’s happened to other critics of Islam, and from the repeated warnings here in Malaysia regarding ‘insults’ to Islam — i.e. being too truthful about it. And the pointed Malaysian warnings about being ‘respectful’ of all religions (‘respect’ for Islam is all the government here really cares about) make it very clear that criticism of Islam is a big, big red line that should never be crossed. Furthermore, in Malaysia it’s quite legal for anyone to be arrested and held indefinitely without charge, trial or access to legal council. It’s a law called the ‘Internal Security Act’ or ‘ISA’ for short and it’s positively medieval. ISA is one of the reasons that you rarely hear criticism of Islam from anyone in this country, in public and even in private, no matter how outrageous things get...
I live in Malaysia, and Malaysians will typically tell foreigners that all members of all religions are treated ‘equally’ and get along amicably. That’s the image sold overseas, at any rate. The reality is quite different. Islam is the official state religion, so it enjoys all sorts of official and unofficial privileges, such as lavish state-built mosques, massive taxpayer-funded proselytization programs for Muslims (but not for other belief systems), sprawling Government-run Islamic universities, a distinct pro-Islamic and pro-jihad tilt in the state-owned and influenced media, and more. On a more personal level, Muslims in Malaysia have on numerous occasions destroyed churches, sometimes with official backing on the flimsiest of pretexts (like for supposed ‘code violations’). The same has also happened to Hindu and Buddhist temples. Bibles are sometimes seized in carload lots by the (Muslim) authorities on one technicality or another. New church construction is heavily discouraged, and it takes years if not decades for new churches to be approved and built. And they must be built in a ‘low profile’ manner if they are allowed to be built at all.
All of these restrictions and the drip-drip-drip of discrimination, or worse, creates a tense and foreboding atmosphere for Christians. It’s pointless for Christians — who are mostly Indians and Chinese — to petition the Malay (Muslim) government for any sort of redress of grievances, because the police, courts and judges here are all owned and operated by Muslims. So increasingly, the ‘infidels’ are leaving — permanently. The same sort of Islamic repression of Christians that has played out in Lebanon, Iraq, Egypt, Pakistan and virtually every other Muslim-ruled country is also playing out here.
Islam is an ideological system which forever cleaves the world into two parts–believers (i.e. Muslims) and the unbelievers (non Muslims), separate and very much unequal. No matter how much Muslims may huff and puff otherwise, unbelievers are never and can never be treated as the equal of any believer...Suffice it to say that violence and intolerance is hard-coded into Islam’s ‘software’; it’s not a ‘bug’, but a feature. Any honest appraisal of the Koran, Hadith and Sira (Islam’s core texts) will bear this out. In Malaysia, the Muslim-controlled government goes to strenuous lengths to make it appear that this country is a ‘harmonious’ mixture of various belief systems. The key word is ‘appear’. Malaysia is indeed a mix of different religions, but it is kept ‘harmonious’ only through Islamic coercion — official and otherwise — and the threat (sometimes actual acts) of violence. ‘Harmonious’ also is a code word in Malaysian political discourse for ‘Islam must remain culturally and politically dominant’. Malaysian Muslims are also never willing to state for the record that a Hindu, Buddhist or Christian is the equal of a Muslim. They cannot — their belief system specifically forbids it, and if a Muslim believes otherwise, he is automatically an apostate — a traitor to Islam.
Malaysia is also becoming more ‘Islamified’ as the years go by — Muslims are become more pious, or at least make more of a show of it more by wearing hijabs, tudongs and other Islamic garb, attending mosque more often, and in other, less obvious but more sinister ways (hatred of America, of Jews and so on). Additionally, and more importantly, the growing Islamification is increasing the numbers of Muslims in Malaysia through procreation, conversion and immigration, and compelling the non Muslims to leave. The departing non-Muslims — mostly Christians, but also Buddhists and Hindus — tend to be the most educated, entrepreneurial and productive Malaysians. This has the makings of a long term economic catastrophe for Malaysia, if the Muslims and their government could but clear the fog of Islam from their minds and come to honest grips with the problem. This ‘brain drain’ issue is well known inside Malaysia, but the real causes (Islamic-inspired bigotry, persecution, enforcement of Sharia) are not discussed, or allowed to be discussed openly.
Why is the world silent? Well, for many of the same reason that the views commonly expressed in FrontPage Magazine are, regrettably, probably not (yet) the views of the majority of Americans. The silence is, as I see it, a combination of many factors: a sincere misunderstanding of Islam, willful blindness, leftist slash Muslim misdirection (‘taqiyya’), and a dash of NIMBY-ism (‘not in my back yard’) thrown in for good measure. Who cares about Christians in Malaysia getting their Bibles seized or their churches bulldozed or blocked from construction? Certainly not the Europeans — they barely care when Jews and Christians in their own streets are terrorized by Muslim thugs, and Europeans (at least the non Muslim ones) are increasingly turning away from Christianity.
As for the Americans, they and their media seem to care vastly more about, say, Sarah Palin ‘s email, or the reality TV show of the week, or their own economic meltdown, then about a bunch of Christians in a far away corner of Asia. The US Government is hardly better — discussion of Muslim persecution of Christians, which is tantamount to criticizing Islam, is heavily discouraged in US government circles, to the best of my knowledge. Who does that leave? The U.N.? Forget about them — anyone criticizing Islam is not even going to get their foot in the door at Turtle Bay, let alone be heard. The Chinese? The Russians? Last I checked with Freedom House, those two countries are not exactly beacons of freedom either. So for the foreseeable future, the Christians of Malaysia and critics of Islam everywhere are on their own. Which is something I’ve pretty much known since the beginning.
One part of the European mindset that I have read about is their consistent anti-Semitism, a factor in their thinking that’s appeared at one point or another in virtually every European country and culture and goes back centuries to the medieval era and earlier. Even an event as immense and horrifying as the Holocaust or ‘Shoah’ only put this attitude into stasis — it didn’t kill it off. Now the level of violence against Jews shows us that the anti-Semitic ghosts of Europe are returning again to haunt us all. And speaking of the Holocaust, remember that Hitler had to have gotten his ideas from somewhere; Vienna around the turn of the century — when and where Hitler spent his youth — was, according to authoritative sources I’ve studied, a veritable cesspool of Jew-hatred. And a few decades later, when Hitler sent European Jewry off to the ovens, or into mass graves, it’s pertinent to remember that the Fuhrer had an awful lot of help from his fellow Europeans, and not just the Germans. From the French to the Poles and beyond, Herr Hitler had a great number of very willing executioners. There is, in fact, a book that discusses this aspect of the Holocaust and goes under that very title. So Europe’s persecution of the Jews, and Europeans who happily tolerate Muslims doing the same, are in fact a harkening back to a tragic, well-worn and time-tested European tradition.
Europe’s increasingly shabby treatment towards Christians and Christianity is a bit more mystifying, at least on the surface. I think, overall, the situation has less in common with deliberate persecution and more in line with mass apathy. Europe is becoming less devout and Europeans are becoming less pious. In short, they just don’t care as much about conventional religion as much as previous centuries, in particular towards Christianity. Of course there are localized exceptions — the Poles and their continued devotion towards Catholicism immediately spring to mind. If any religion is popular in Europe nowadays, other than Islam (a political movement pretending to be a religion), it’s Marxism slash environmentalism (a religion pretending to be a political movement). Political correctness and leftist-inspired atheism are much more politically potent in Europe than they are in the US, at least for now, and that could be changing in America as we speak. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the churches of Europe started to empty out at about the same time that mosques started to spring up everywhere across Europe and become filled to overflowing. Islam is taking advantage of the power vacuum, the lack of a strong competing belief system, and of course, the leftist-Marxist PC school of thought is a proven enabler and ally of Islam. All of this added together explains, I believe to a large degree, the very passive European attitude and lack of response to the degradation and growing persecution of Christians in Europe and beyond.
I was raised as a Christian and I’ve held true to what I was taught, although I must admit that I times I’ve had my doubts. One of my ‘beefs’ with many Christians is their relative pacifism in the face of aggression. For example, when I open up to other Christians about what Muslims are doing to other Christians both here in Malaysia and in other Muslim countries, the usual response isn’t outrage, but a sort of dhimmified sadness: “oh how horrible — I shall pray for them.” And other than that, they do nothing. I know that Christians are taught to ‘turn the other cheek’ when provoked as this is taught in the Bible, but I also know about the narrative of Christ in the temple with the money changers. Christ wasn’t a wimp, and Christians shouldn’t be either...
My studies of Islam have brought me up close and personal with evil, unspeakable evil that maims and destroys everything standing in its way. I thought 9-11 was the ultimate inhumanity that was possible, with office workers crushed, burned, asphyxiated and flung out of burning sky-scraping towers to their deaths. The past nine years or so have dramatically and forever disabused me of that notion. We know that devout Muslims (I prefer this to calling them ‘radical’ or ‘militant’ Muslims) will stop at absolutely nothing. No barbaric act is too wanton to commit, like gouging out the eyes of women, or deliberating beating very young children, or stabbing infants to death. No wonder so many people, Americans and others, would just prefer to shut it out and gossip about celebrities, watch sports or reality shows, and remain blissfully ignorant of the terrible, ugly realities running loose in our world. But ignorance is not an option anymore, if it ever was, not if the free people of the world want to remain that way. Nor is it an option if non-Muslims want to retain their equality and human rights. We must not only be educated, but we must also maintain faith in our own Judeo-Christian heritage if we are to survive...
The second powerful advantage Islam has is the current Western policy regimen, combined with the unofficial ruling doctrine of ‘Political Correctness’ in both Europe and the US — Islam’s two chief opponents. Muslims, under current laws, are free to move anywhere in North America or Europe, buy property anywhere, and build mosques and madrassas at virtually any location they please (the Ground Zero mosque has proven to be a notable exception). In the US, Islam enjoys undisputed 1st Amendment (‘Freedom of Religion’) constitutional protections. Muslims can and have gained access to trusted positions within corporations and government, including but not limited to the military, intelligence agencies, and law enforcement. Muslims in the West can and do congregate in sizable numbers over large areas. These Muslim areas are invariably transformed into ‘no-go’ areas, de facto Sharia-ruled enclaves off limits to police, and can be found blighting most major urban areas in Europe and increasingly in the US as well (Dearborn et al). The situation in fact in Europe has already deteriorated to the point where Muslims rule virtually entire cities and run riots, unchecked by any infidel authority, such as in Malmö, Sweden. To make matters worse, spineless, opportunist Western politicians play for short term political gains by pandering to Muslims for votes. Political correctness muzzles and mutes much (but not all) opposition to Muslim expansion.
On the positive side of the ledger are the facts that speak to us from history, especially about fascistic movements. History teaches us that totalitarian forces have almost always, eventually, overextended and overreached. Tyranny usually overplays its hand. Remember that Herr Hitler, had he stopped after seizing all of Czechoslovakia in early 1939, could have probably avoided war with the USSR and the Allies, and Nazi Germany could still have still existed up to this day. For another, perhaps more pertinent example, the Palestinian Arabs were offered half of what is now Israel in 1948 from the UN absolutely ‘free of charge’, and a few decades of demographic expansion and immigration after that would have most likely peaceably won all of ‘Palestine’ for the Muslims without firing a shot. Instead the Arabs, acting on their own Islamic-inspired hatreds, opted for war. More than 60 years of intermittent war and constant terrorism against a small band of Jews has won them nothing, except perhaps the sympathies of the international media, not to mention a lot of Muslims and their leftist friends. And we know full well how dysfunctional Muslim cultures are. Islam and Muslims are very good at growing their numbers and influence, both politically and culturally, especially in the West, but at everything else they are a miserable failure. Societies with psychopathic tendencies writ large are societies that inevitably fail — it’s just a question of when. One can only hope that it’s soon enough.
In spite of ourselves, it is not too late to act. It is merely a question of political will, which of course and as many readers will know all too well, is sadly lacking at this time. The West needs an eloquent, rhetorical powerhouse and nonpareil visionary like Churchill to lead us out of this darkness, and here we are stuck with Barack Hussein Obama . But with a presidential election next year, there’s always hope. As to what should be done beyond winning presidential elections, I think many pundits have already outlined excellent courses of action in a comprehensive fashion (here are some great ideas, and here’s some more). So there’s plenty of awareness out there already as to what needs to be done. Policies and doctrines are not set in stone and need to be changed now, from top to bottom. The current American regime is flatly unwilling to do anything productive or in the best interests of their (non Muslim) constituents, except perhaps by accident. Replacing that regime is, of course, in the hands of American voters.
And Christians need to shed their pacifistic leanings and become a lot more pro-active in their defense. The Vatican needs to stop mouthing pleasantries towards Muslims and understand that Muslims are not and can never be genuine allies of the Catholic Church or of any other group of Christians. Interfaith ‘dialogues’ with Muslims are not only pointless, but dangerous, for they offer a vector for dissembling taqiyya-spouting Muslims to continue confusing and misleading otherwise well-meaning Christians.
The squabbling factions of the West, be they atheists, or Christians, or Jews, or whomever — need to put aside their differences, gather under a big proverbial political tent, and unite against Islamofascism. If the Allies could unite with the Soviet Union against Hitler 70 years ago and be victorious, then we can do something like it again. Sure, it could be well-nigh impossible, but if we don’t, the alternative is extermination.
Islam is nothing more than an ideology, a collection of ideas, and the best way to fight a belief system is with another, superior belief system. Superior ideas are something the West has in spades. But thanks to Political Correctness, the West never argues in favor of its own superior culture. The West has intentionally and wrongly ceded the initiative in the critical war of ideas to Muslims, who are of course never restricted from disseminating the false or imaginary advantages of Islam, Muslim culture, Sharia, etc. The West has intentionally kneecapped itself, and this must stop.
“Islam stands for Intolerance, Slaughter, Loot, Arson and Molestation” says an author who lived through the Islamification of his country[lxxxix]. Regardless, for the modern American or European, the statement that “Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance” is simply a lie propagated for decades, particularly, since September 11, 2001. Muslim leaders in the United States and other Western nations had to push their efforts at hiding Islam’s true nature into high gear, trying to counterbalance the impact that was made by the sight of Palestinians and other Muslims (some in this very nation) cheering and celebrating the destruction of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Unfortunately, many theologically liberal and compromising people in most of the mainline Christian denominations have gone right along with these attempts at whitewashing Islam’s image, either out of blind ignorance or unthinking sympathy for Mohammed’s religion. Even in many traditionally conservative Protestant churches, pastors have invited false teachers from Islam to present that religion to their congregants, and the image given is invariably that of a peaceful, loving, tender-hearted faith whose members are absolutely appalled at the violence committed by “a few fringe radicals”.
Islam is a religion which was born out of violence, spread through violence, and which is maintained (even today) through violence. Whether by reviewing Islam through the Koran (and its commentaries) or, the manner and methodology by which the “faithful” (liberal, moderate, conservative, or radical) Muslim practices his religion, Islam is violence per se. Though violence towards those of other faiths is certainly not unknown among other of the world’s religions, particularly Christianity in the Dark and Middle Ages, Islam goes further than any other religion in both its holy texts, interpretations and religiously-motivated violence against unbelievers. It is not just a matter of tolerating it or of turning a blind eye. Rather, the Koran and the ahadith support and encourage the faithful (under pain of death) to press violent jihad against non-Muslims. There can be no other logical, objective conclusion.
The model is quite simple: immigrate, refuse to assimilate, form religious enclaves that are actively hostile to the surrounding native populations, commit criminal acts and exploit welfare programs, followed by threatened or actual violence and civil strife when the Muslims are “offended” by the native population who are actually defending themselves. This is all shielded by cries of “racism” and “Islamophobia” that are designed to generate sympathy and the fear of lawsuits or legal prosecution by left-leaning governments against those who challenge this state of affairs. The moderate or liberal Muslim will simply say they are not the radical element of their faith. But, truth be told, the radical furthers the cause of Islam (convert, submit or die) and all Muslims benefit thereby.
At its core, Islam is a religious mission to convert, enslave or annihilate all humanity. All Muslims are religiously obliged to disseminate the Islamic faith throughout the world by whatever means necessary. Infidels who stand in the way, creating obstacles for the da’wa, are blamed for this state of war (jihad). In other words, those who resist Islam cause wars and are responsible for them. Only when Muslim power is weak is “temporary truce” (hudna) allowed (Islamic jurists differ on the definition of “temporary”).” Even modern Islamic authorities from the Indian subcontinent agree with their Middle Eastern and Western brethren on this issue. The division of Islamic Jihad into “offensive” and “defensive” is not permissible. Islamic Jihad is both offensive and defensive at one and the same time. It is offensive because the Muslim party attacks the rule of an opposing ideology, and it is defensive because the Muslim Party is constrained to capture state power in order to protect the principles of Islam in space-time forces. Hence, “defense” is defined as destroying any system not in agreement with Islam. Under this ideology, “defense” then becomes not just an option, but an act of piety. Nu’mani demonstrates this redefinition in his justification of jihad as a noble and spotless act,
Because it is the duty of good Muslims to “liberate” the rest of the world from the tyranny and oppression of their native, non-Islamic political, religious, and philosophical systems, the ends justifies the means. Violence is also the prescribed suggestion for dealing with “hypocrites” - those members of the Islamic community who are insufficiently Islamic in their approach to the religion.[xc] Essentially, whatever force is deemed necessary to induce Muslims who are insufficiently pious to get with the program may be used to coerce them into religious piety and at least outward conformity with the strictures of the Sharia law.
This has long been the mission of Islam. On May 29, 1453, a civilization was wiped out irrevocably by this ideology and the same threat exists today. The Eastern Catholic Coptic Church had left a glorious legacy in learning and in art; it had raised whole countries from barbarism and had given refinement to others; its strength and its intelligence for centuries had been the protection of Christendom. For eleven centuries, Constantinople had been the center of the world of light. The quick brilliance, the interest and the aestheticism of the Greek, the proud stability and the administrative competence of the Roman, the transcendental intensity of the Christian from the East, welded together into a fluid, sensitive mass, were now put to sleep. Constantinople was to now become the seat of brutal force, ignorance, and magnificent tastelessness courtesy of Islam.
After gaining this beach head, the Muslim Turks moved further up into the Balkans and Central Europe until finally being turned back, in their inexorable spread of their poison, at the gates of Vienna in 1683. During their time of domination over the Balkan peoples, the Muslim laid many heavy oppressions upon these conquered peoples. One particularly despicable practice, still hailed by the Koran today, known as devsirme, was that of taking “infidel” children from their parents as slaves. Once every five years, the Muslims would take every Orthodox and Catholic child they could get their hands on from among the unconverted Balkan peoples, and bring them as slaves to the Sultan. The girls usually were destined to serve as concubines (prostitutes) in the harems of Turkish leaders. The boys were forcibly converted to Islam, and then thoroughly indoctrinated in Muslim fanaticism and Turkish nationalism. After their “education” was finished, these were then highly trained in the arts of war and made into warrior-slaves, known as Janissaries. The Janissaries served as the Sultan’s police force and military elite throughout the Ottoman Empire, many of them enforcing his decrees back in the very homelands from which they had been stolen. Ruthless, fanatical and willing to die for their cause, these young men became the prototype of the 21st century Muslim jihadist.
Muslim nastiness towards the conquered peoples of the Balkans still plays a role in the politics of that region today. The Albanians and Bosnians are both Muslim groups whose ancestors originally converted to avoid the child-conscription and religion tax. The Serbs and Croats hate the Bosnians and Albanians with a passion because of the historical legacy of the atrocities that the Turkish overlords perpetrated against their Slavic underlings. The enmity today between the Greeks and Turks derives from the brutality of Muslim rule in Greece, and the barbarity of the Turkish attempts to put down the Greek war for independence (from 1821-1827). We are all aware of the atrocities of the Bosnian War in the 1990’s.
Even when violence is not a practical option, orthodox Muslims still seek the subjugation of opposing belief systems. As a former Muslim tells us, “Ah,” the scoffer might say, “What about the crusades, or the inquisitions, or the conquistadors and the subjugations of natives all over the world, or even what about the abortion clinic violence?!” Some would posit that the simple answer is that not a single one of these has the least bit to do with “Bible-believing Christianity” ignoring the pogroms of the Protestant Reformation, French Revolution and American Know-Nothings as if they had never happened. Suffice it to say that Islam is a violent religion because of the teachings of the Koran and the ahadith which both, verbatim, dictate that violence. The Muslims who perpetrate the acts of violence and terrorism in this world are those who take these texts the most literally, who try the most scrupulously to live by them and emulate their hero Mohammed. The modern Catholic and Protestant may be judged by the same measure. Even those latter who take a literal approach to the Bible (even the most strident, in their ignorance and superstition) do not conduct Jihad (a Holy War) to attain the after-life or to change the world to their brand of Christianity.
Do fundamentalist, traditionalist or evangelical Catholics or Protestants commit terrorist bombings? Do they shoot infidels and wage holy war? Do they seek to oppress non-believers and submit them to slavery? Jesus said that His kingdom is not of this world and, yet, the Muslim imposes exactly the opposite view. Enough said! The many alleged “atrocities” committed in the name of Catholic Christendom must be judged in the context of their historical era. The Muslim simply continues to live in the 7th-13th century and refuses to move forward. Therefore, the Catholic Church need make no apology to its Protestant brethren, nor anyone else, for the Crusades, Inquisitions, executions and other persecution of heretics. The same can be said for the Protestant inquisitions, witch- burnings, persecutions or racism. But, we live in the 21st century, ostensibly, living under the rule of rationale, compassionate law. What place is there at the table for the Muslim under his medieval, Sharia law?
Recall that Pope Urban II did not call the First Crusade until 1095 some 400+ years after the Muslim horde first threatened Christendom. Despite modern laments about medieval colonialism, the crusade’s real purpose was to turn back Muslim conquests and restore formerly Christian lands to Christian control. The entire history of the crusades is one of Western reaction to Muslim advances. The crusades were no more offensive than was the American invasion of Normandy. As it happened, the First Crusade was amazingly, almost miraculously, successful. The crusaders marched hundreds of miles deep into enemy territory and recaptured not only the lost cities of Nicaea and Antioch, but in 1099 Jerusalem itself. Simply put, the Crusades were a response to Muslim aggression. If the Muslims had not waged offensive war and continued in their plans to conquer the known world, the Crusades would never have happened. In a sense, blame for the Crusades lies at the feet of the Muslims themselves. It is doubtful, lacking the impetus provided by Emperor Alexius’ appeal and Pope Urban’s oration, that it would ever have occurred to the feudal nobles of Western Europe to even go adventuring thousands of miles away from home in the first place.
And, what of the Muslim contention that the Bible was somehow an impetus for the Catholic Crusaders to go pillaging across the Levant? Well, there is no real evidence that the Crusaders or those calling for crusade relied on the Bible as justification. For example, when one looks at the actual text of the great Pope Urban II’s call for crusade, at the Church’s Council of Clermont in 1095, we see exactly three references to passages from the Bible: two of them from the Gospel of Matthew, one of them from the Gospel of Luke, and none of them in any way used in the actual call to crusade-all are used to reprove the “Christians” for being blind and careless.
In fact, in Pope Urban II’s speech on November 27, 1095 AD, he discussed Cluniac reforms of the Church, and also extended the excommunication of Philip I of France for his adulterous remarriage to Bertrade of Montfort. And, he spoke for the first time about the problems in the East, as he urged Western Christians to fight against the Muslims who had occupied the Holy Land and were attacking the Eastern Roman Empire, “Freshly quickened by the divine correction, you must apply the strength of your righteousness to another matter which concerns you as well as God. For your brethren who live in the East are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania (the Greek empire) as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont, which is called the Arm of St. George. They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impurity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ’s heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends.”[xci]
“Let those who have been accustomed unjustly to wage private warfare against the faithful now go against the infidels and end with victory this war which should have been begun long ago. Let those who for a long time, have been robbers, now become knights. Let those who have been fighting against their brothers and relatives now fight in a proper way against the barbarians. Let those who have been serving as mercenaries for small pay now obtain the eternal reward. Let those who have been wearing themselves out in both body and soul now work for a double honor.” Please note that the Pope does not even mention Jerusalem at all but, rather, the Muslim attack against the Byzantine Empire. On the last day of the council, a general call was sent out to the knights and nobles of France to take up the crusade.
Pope Urban’s own letter, addressed to the faithful “waiting in Flanders,” does lament the fact that Turks, in addition to ravaging the “churches of God in the eastern regions,” have seized “the Holy City of Christ, embellished by his passion and resurrection—and blasphemy to say it—have sold her and her churches into abominable slavery.” Yet he does not explicitly call for the re-conquest of Jerusalem. Rather he explicitly calls for the military “liberation” of the Eastern Churches, and appoints Adhemar of Le Puy to lead the Crusade, to set out on the day of the Assumption of Mary, August 15, 1096.
Thus, there is nothing which, in any way, suggests that Pope Urban pointed to the Bible to justify or encourage the crusading. Instead, he lays out the political situation as it existed at that time, and warns that unless the Muslim aggression is stopped, more “Christians” will be conquered and enslaved. A message that Catholic and non-Catholic alike should take to heart in the United States today.
[i]The US Dept. of Homeland Security’s Office of the Inspector General’s May 11, 2011, report Supervision of Aliens Commensurate with Risk. The countries listed are: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Djiboudi, Egypt, Eritrea (horn of Africa), Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kazakhistan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Muaritania, Morocco, Gaza West Bank, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, and Yemen.
[ii]Navy Seahorse combat helicopters which were never designed to fly in desert sand, nor, were rubber bullets and Carter’s orders to avoid casualties in the rescue attempt ever going to work against the fanatic’s compound.
citing the following references: Briffault, Robert 1927 The Mothers George
Allen Unwin, London; Browning, Ian 1974 Petra, Chatto & Windus, London;
Crone, Patricia 1987 Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam Princeton University
Press p. 231; Doe, Brian 1971 Southern Arabia, Thames and Hudson, London;
Driver, G. R. 1956 Canaanite Myths and Legends, T & T Clark, Edinburgh;
Glueck, Nelson 1966 Deities and Dolphins, Cassel, London; Green, Tamara 1992
The City of the Moon God, E.J. Brill, Leiden; Negev, Abraham 1986 Nabatean
Archaeology Today, NY Univ. Pr., New York; Pritchard, James ed. 1974 Solomon
and Sheba, Phaidon, N.Y.; and Walker, Barbara 1983 The Woman’s
Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets, Harper & Row, S. F.
is the 10th generation from Noah (through Shem) and was born 352 years after
the Great Flood. See, Genesis 11:26. The 3rd son of Terah born when
his father (Terah) was 130 years old.
invisible spirit, mentioned in the Koran, and believed by Muslims to inhabit
the earth and influence mankind by appearing as a human or animal.
in both the Bible and Koran, the Queen of Sheba’s kingdom was in modern
day Yemen in the 10th Century BC. She was born on January 5th and was
greatly admired (see, Kings 10:1-3 and Chronicles 9:1-2).
dam was located near the Queen of Sheba’s kingdom, was constructed circa
1750 BC, burst circa 450 AD with its final demise occurring circa 575 AD.
Its final destruction most likely led to the migration of some 50,000 Arabs
as mentioned in the Koran.
Nabih, al-Kabali, The Book of Idols (Princeton Univ. Press 1952)
Rice, Easter definitions (Doubleday, 1978).
C. Camphausen, The Ka’bah at Mecca’, Bres, No.139 (Holland 1989).
Dawood, The Koran, p. 1, trans. (5th ed., Harmondsworth, 1990); P. Masson-Oursel
and Louise Morin, ‘Mythology of Ancient Persia’, in New Larousse
Encyclopedia of Mythology (2nd ed., London, 1968), p. 323.
Roux, Ancient Iraq, p. 420 (3rd ed., Harmondsworth, 1992).
H. Gordon, Canaanite Mythology in S.N. Kramer (ed.), Mythologies
of the Ancient World, pp. 196-7 (1961).
[xvi]Hourani, Albert, A History of the Arab peoples, p. 16 (Harvard University Press 1991).
[xix]M. R. M. Abduraheem, Mohammed The Prophet, pp. 3-4 (1971).
Tareekh Al-Umam Al-Islamiyah 1/56; Ibn Hisham 1/152,153.
Patricia Crone, Meccan Trade And The Rise Of Islam, pp. 193-194
(Princeton University Press 1987).
[xxii]12. Woolley, Sir Leonard, Ur of the Chaldees (Pelican Books 1938); Excavations at Ur (Ernest Benn, Ltd., 1954).
Bright, John, A History of Israel, pp. 80, 91
(SCM Press, 1960).
[xxiv]15. Segal J.B., The Sabian Mysteries in Vanished Civilizations ed. (Edward Bacon, Thames & Hudson, 1963); Edessa The Blessed City, (Clarendon Press, 1970).
[xxv]Malamat, Abraham 1984 Mari and the Early Israelite Experience, p. 31 (Oxford Press 1984); Bright, John, 1960 A History of Israel, p. 70 (SCM Press 1960).
[xxvii] Jay, Nancy, Throughout Your Generations Forever (Univ. Chicago Press 1991).
Gerda, The Creation of Patriarchy, p. 168 (Oxford 1986).
[xxxi]22. Glenn, Menahem G., The Jewish Quarterly Review, 59/1, pp. 73-75 (1968).
Lillith, the first, disobedient wife of Adam and consort of Ba’al (Satan
or the Keeper of the Gates of Hell) as recorded in the Jewish Mythology.
[xxxv]Note the similarity of other Egyptian, Hindu, Greek and Roman Gods, most notably, Chronus and/or Zeus.
Grollier Multimedia Encyclopedia 1993.
Toby, What Is the Koran? The
Atlantic Monthly 283.1, p. 43(1) (Jan
1999) noting that ancient versions of
the Koran differ with the current text; see also, www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/792720/posts
al Koran 6/297; Ibn Hisham 1/20-36.
Jewish holy mountain where legend states that Adam, Eve, and Moses are
buried. Also, the mountain form which the 10 Commandments were taken down by
Moses; and the reputed location for the burial of Noah’s Ark.
Ishaq’s biography of Mohammed, page 36
Ishaq, page 72
of Bukhari, 9.111-15
volume 6 page 76.
Vol. 9, page 167, note 1151.
Mohammed at Mecca, pages 40, 41; and az-Zuhri’s materials.
69:41, 42; and 81:22-25.
Al-Baqarah 2:97: Say: Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel - for he brings down
the (revelation) to the heart by Allah’s will, a confirmation of what went
before, and guidance and glad tidings for those who believe.
Genesis Chapters 16-21; Galatians, Chapter 4.
I heard a man’s voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said,
“Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.” So he came near where
I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face...but he
touched me, and set me upright... (Daniel 8:16-18)
Al-Tawbah 9:30 MPT
Hesham, part 2, pages 74, 75).
Al-Alaq 96:1-5. Professor Haanein Mohammed Makhloof, on page 508 of his
Dictionary of the Meanings of Words of the Koran, says that the Arabic word
“alaq” translated into English as “clot” means frozen blood.
Sad 38:71, 72.
1, page 344.
Hadith of Bukhari, Volume 7, #660.
4.490, 7.658, 7.660, 7.661, 8.89, 8.400; Ibn Hisham, The Life of Mohammed,
Sa’d’s Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir (Book of the Major Classes),
volume 2, pages 244 to 248.
(the 2nd most important book in Sunni Islam) 2.225.
Life of Mohammed, page 461.
al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, vol. 1, page 265.
of Mohammed’s wives was only 8 years old.
volume 9, #64
[xci]There are six main sources about this portion of the council: the anonymous Gesta Francorum (The Deeds of the Franks, circa 1101 AD), Fulcher of Chartres (actually present at the council), Robert the Monk (may/not have been present), Baldric, Aarchbishop of Dol (not present) and Guibert de Nogent (not present). All of these accounts differ widely from one another. There is also a letter written by the Pope himself (December of 1095) referring to the council. This citation is from Fulcher of Chartres, the only one conclusively present.