It is currently Sun Jan 22, 2017 3:58 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 1:57 pm 
Offline
Isis

Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:42 am
Posts: 1006
Below is an excerpt from Bernard Raquin's book with that title. I also have another source that dissects the story of Mohammed and shows it's source to be likely Jewish also and cites evidences of Jewish involvement in the creation of the Koran and probably the invention of Mohammed the "Prophet" (I will post part of this long dissection in a separate post).

These are the only two articles that question the existence of Mohammed and the origin of the Koran that I have found so far. I started on a quest to find any historical information whatsoever outside of the Koran. I long ago suspected that he also might be a fiction, but only now decided to consider it seriously. So far in my internet search I have not found a genuine historical acct. of Mohammed after several links and different search terms. Perhaps I am not using the best search terms or or tool. If anyone has anything to contribute in this matter please do!

Quote:
A Jew named Mohammed

Has Mohammed ever existed ?

Enquiry on monotheism

Bernard Raquin

Thanks to archaeological discoveries, to the translations from sumerian, egyptian and aramaic, each and everyone can at last discover the origin of the "sacred texts". Far from being the word of " God", the revealed religions recycled archaic old myths. One will see why they have provoked so many slaughters, by drawing their followers in the trap of ignorance and vanity.
This work, very different from the official legends, takes us into one of the most fabulous human creations, the invention of myths and prophets. The author invites you to a fascinating inquiry into the heart of monotheist religions.
You will discover that, as other biblical prophets, Mohammed seems to be one of the most famous historical hoaxes. You will also learn why, in which period and in which language the Coran was written and with which aim.
Indispensable for human beings in quest of spiritual authenticity, and also for every person wishing to understand current events and defend the freedom of expression.

Bernard Raquin, psychotherapist and teacher in many seminars, has published a number of books on spirituality and personal development.
Following the murder of his sister by her son and husband claiming to be from "Islam", he decided to unveil the falsification and to shed light on the spiritual path and historical truth

"The ones who take in broad daylight any new proposition are first called heretics" (Montesquieu)

Does monotheism lead preferentially to crime? The question was often asked by specialists of religions. The nine first Califs of Islam perished assassinated. Preventing to think never served human dignity, neither the cause of God. Scholars wondered if certain religions are not constitutively violent. But more than monotheism, it is the prophetic neurosis which is so often devil's mouthpiece...p.23

Unfortunately for the beliefs of Christians, the historian Philo of Alexandria, who was Jesus' contemporary and wrote several volumes, do not quote him, and if the Messiah is famous until Syria, should we believe Matthew, and until Egypt or Babylon since the Mages have come from there, while is he not quoted anywhere in the chronicles? For the past 2000 years, billions of Christian have wondered : why are we still obliged to commit evil and suffer it, and indeed live, as if Christ had never come?...

[The author put a few paragraphs a little more on the right to indicate more personal and psychological reflections]
At the beginning was the lie : lies of prophets who forced visions and voices to serve a political cause. I do not doubt visions, an eternal and dream perception of the world. But a vision giving even instructions about food, laws, hygiene and war is an illusion, because nothing is more fluctuating than the customs and beliefs. Visions are images drawn from the collective unconscious, teachings of wisdom, they are allegorical and not ready-made answers to circumstantial problems.
The three "biblical" religions have in common the destruction of sources, the disregard for others and their pretension to detain the revealed truth. Revealed by whom ? Not by a hoary sage full of wisdom, polished by decades of asceticism and ennobling acts, but by vociferous prophets. If God exists, it may be doubted that He chose personality as controversial as Moses, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, David or Mohammed, such as described by the tradition. The prophetic points to his victim, the sage shows the path.


In what monotheism has served the cause of the unique God, who may well have done without this wicked homage? Even the Gospels contain rages. Some claim that the apostles represented a movement of rebellion... Simon the Zealot, who became later Peter, was, as his name indicates, an activist. His brother Judah (not Judah the traitor) was called Iscariot, i.e. holder of the dagger with a bent edge... Then this group was destroyed and consequently divinized, according to a mechanism which was well analyzed by René Girard. The exceptional person becomes a devil, a hero or a saint.
In which way polytheist were pagans ? Pagans, the Sumerians , inventors of writing, of laws, of the wheel, of most of the myths which forged our civilization? They who have created schools and the very first parliament? Pagans, the Babylonians, inventors of astronomy, of medicine, of treatises on plants and of the fabrication of therapeutical drugs?
Ignorant, the Egyptians, where men and women were equals? It is sufficient to go in any museum to become immediately struck by wonder, and modest.
Idolatrous, the Zoroastrians, without image of God, inciting to go beyond oneself through "good thoughts, good words and good actions"?
Pagans, Krishna's devotees, seeking forgiveness and goodness in the cult of fecundity, intoxicated with the gratitude for the boons from heaven? Infidels, the worshippers of Vishnu, good ascetics who where detached from the appearances of the world, who wanted to realize the Atman, and merge into the deep consciousness of the Whole ?
Pagans, the Amerindians and their prestigious civilization? The Aztec ?!
Idolatrous, the Celts and their refined conception of the divine, who have dominated the world during several millennia and which have elaborated myths taken again by Christianity?
Ignorant, the Buddhist, whose spirit glides above the feelings of villainy? Idolatrous, the Jains, who do not kill animal and forbid to themselves any violence ?
How much base feelings this despise, this self-conceit expresses. My Goodness! Free us from these desert prophets, hellish creatures, presumptuous, wicked, ignorant, who come out from the dark age heading hosts of warriors of apocalypse, with foam at the mouth, with erected sticks, the very servants of Satan!
"The prophets, these goats with a long beard, cannot pretend to any intellectual or spiritual superiority... Their duplicity is obvious by their very contradicting each other... As for the Coran, it is only a bundle of nonsensical fables... The treatises of the Ancients such as Plato, Aristotle, Euclides or Hippocrat have rendered greater services to humanity." (Ibn Warraq quoting Abdel Razin Why I am not a Muslim, p.324)

The soul who is seeking ecstasies against the others, end in the cul-de-sac of mad anger. And the mystic who is petrified by awe will more surely meet the "lower astral plane", the universe of those deities which are evoked in the Tibetan Book of the Dead rather than bliss and wonder.
The savior god was hardly a new thing when Jesus (whose name means I save) appeared : Apollo, Adonis, Osiris, Serapis, Tanmuz in Sumer and Syria, Odin in ancient Germany, Dionysos-Bacchus, Orpheus, Mithra and Horus were around....(p.55-56)
When monotheism has inevitably lead to wars against the inevitable heresies, young saplings sprout, a fresh wind from the human spirit, who rediscovers the psychic functions of the old gods. And for that, no need of books or ancient idols: the functioning of the brain is sufficient. Any person is able to rediscover them by listening to his unconscious. Monotheism, opposed to the functioning of the brain, does not exist in any religion. Our brain needs, to transform the thoughts in words, to elaborate representations. This explain, to my eye, why pure monotheism, which was meant only for rare sages, produces so many pathologies among ordinary believers, by pushing them towards schizophrenia.56

Among the other influences on Jesus, the room is lacking to evoke Apollonius of Tyan, and overall Mithra whose cult has been entirely copied by the Christians. [Raquin quotes many details and proofs of this well-known fact]
56

This Manichaeism appears again in the concept of dar-ul-islam and dar-ul-harb. The land which have been conquered by Islam are "land (House) of submission". The other countries are "lands of the war". Intoxicated herds, which have been rendered mad by heinous preachers, are allowed to plunder, kill, destroy the countries of the "infidels" - who in fact they are themselves. Just as Mohammed was put above God by making him speak, one puts Muslims beyond the others, and the vociferous preacher feels he is superior to the one who is good. Thus, a stupid person feels authorized to abuse a girl if she eats during the Ramadan. Any pretentious fellow, because he prostrates before nothingness, feels that he has the power to judge the scholar. Here lies undoubtedly the biggest tragedy, and the basis of every tyranny: to give to mediocre people the power to judge their neighbors...67

People are summoned not to believe in jinns, but if they believe, they are punished. Here is a constant feature of the Coran: pretending everything and its opposite, installing a series of double binds which prevent reflection, paralyze logic, to force the acceptance of any theological contortion. These permanent contradictions are strong evidence that the Coran is a collective work. Every religion has its own contradictions. But the Coran is false and contradictory on almost everything. And neither the Bible or the Gospels claim to have an unique author. Or one should admit that Gabriel had become doting.
The "double bind" means receiving two opposite orders, which provokes a stupefaction and paralyze intelligence: Allah agrees only to Islam as a religion - but he says "no coercion in religion". Don't force your women into prostitution - but if you do it, Allah will console them. Be stoned to death if you don't believe in Allah - but anyhow everything comes from Allah. Don't be among those who associate Allah with other divinities - but anyhow your destiny is already written on a tablet since your birth. Allah does not like that we divulgate wicked words - unless one is being victim of them. "We have divided the earth into communities: among them there are the right ones - and others which are not" (Co 7, 168 ). There is no other God than God - and still, there are angels, jinns, ogers; now, coming from Allah, they incite to disagree with him.
But other assertions are still worse : "There is refuge against Allah only in Him" (Co 9, 118) or "Who defends you day and night against the Benefactor?" (Co 21, 42) or "I am seeking the protection of the Lord of the Dawn against the evil he has created..." (113)
This reminds of the child beaten by his or her mother, and who, having only her, goes and seek refuge near her. Neurosis and despair are guaranteed. Take refuge against Allah in Allah ? Defend oneself against the Benefactor? Ask from the creator of evil for protection? p. 68-69

At the beginning Islam had no vocation to universality. Every prophet addressed his own community: "... When we have sent a witness to every community, and we have made you a witness for those people." (4, 41) The religious leaders of primitive Islam which indeed were Samaritan or Ismaelian rabbis, forbade the conversions to the new sect of non-Arabs for two centuries, since one cannot convert to become the descendant of Ismael, just as one could not become the children of Israel. Then, the conversion system became exploited to dominate, when the Caliphs understood the interest to make people's mind submissive to the Arabic domination disguised in Allah, when 600,000 words, hadîs, came out to justify their political agenda, when Mohamed's life was invented. (p.71)

Allah's origin :
Allah has got about one hundred "beautiful names". A poem from the 12th century B.C. grants to the Babylonian God Marduk about 50 names, coming from the defeated and assimilated deities. Most of these will qualify Allah.
The word Allah comes from the Sumerian divinity Lilitu, evolving in Lilith (the Mother-Goddess of the Hebrew), and then in Al-ilat (that of the Arabs), but also in El, God, in akkadian. One finds also in Arabic Ala, 'to be terrified'. The name Allah has certainly been the masculine form that the original name Al-ilat has taken.(p.71)

Devil's fall in the Coran
Later, Mohammed will get the authorization from Allah to use deceit, lie and dissimulation (taquyya). "Hide what you have in the heart." A verse (16, 91) asks not to break one's oath, but another (5, 89) allows perjury or incites to commit it (96). The development of this devastating doctrine comes still more from the hadîs....
All this has its origin in the Bible : Michea has the vision that Yahve holds a counsel with the heavenly hosts, allowing the Spirit to become the spirit of lying against the adversaries of Israel. God asks from his angels to help him to seduce the king Achab. "Then, one of them appeared before the Lord to tell Him : 'I am the one who will seduce him. And the Lord told him : 'In which way'? He answered: 'I will go and be a spirit of lie in the mouths of all his prophets. The Lord agreed : 'You will seduce him, since indeed you have this power. Go and do in this wise." (1 Kings 22 19)
Yahve agrees to seduction, which is nonetheless the characteristic of Satan. The CoTran will take again this theme, which is a blaspheme but still natural for the superstitions of that time. The more one invokes, the less one respects...

These intrigues provoke serious spiritual disorders. For sin is Allah's work, while Satan is there only to fix the practical details... Fanatics are basically victims of an individual neurosis, but when they come together to intoxicate themselves and share their hatred, they fall into psychosis, prisoners of themselves, rendering themselves mutually mad. (p.76)

Allah's fall
Never spiritual discussions are to be found in the Coran or Mohammed's life, except boring slogans. Never mystical preoccupations are present, which would enable one to accord himself with a superior moral code. Never renunciation to illusions and passions is hinted at. Never the ultimatum aim of humanity is the object of questioning. Forgiving is granted according to Allah's whims; the absolution of sins does not come from an inner transmutation, but from a mechanical profession of faith, all the more claimed and shown that it is not put into practice by good actions in life. One finds only the crazy frailty of an anxious Allah, because his subjects could start venerating a secondary divinity, whom still He has created. In the text one can only find the proclamation of the tragic despair of a unique God, killing his own creatures after sending Satan to them to have them doubt; obliged to slaughter people to force survivors to prostrate before Himself. One sees in this book only Allah's vertiginous fall into absolute nothingness, at war against its own creation, having for satisfaction only servile people, robots devoid of consciousness and without freedom. One reads only devilish pleasures, threats and revenges.
The rights of the human creatures are threaded upon, betrayal is sanctified; deceit is recommended; cruelty, baseness, possessiveness, cupidity are encouraged; lie and dissimulation are favored.
Psalmody is there in lieu of piety. Recitations take the place of reflection, litanies that of elevation. And all that is chanted until entrancement, to forget, if only for one hour, the tragic condemnation for the sin, not Adam's one, but still worse, for the sin of living, because the very life of a human being is unbearable to Allah, indeed jealous not to exist himself.
A human being will not be allowed the temptation to show love, on the contrary, he will have to reject his own family : "Don't take for friends your fathers or your brothers, if they prefer incredulity to faith." (9, 23) "It is not befitting to the prophet or the believers to implore God's forgiving for polytheists, be they their near and dear, while they know that these people will be inmates of the Furnace." (9, 113) "You will not find people believing in God and in the Last Day, and showing love to those who oppose God and his prophet, be they their fathers, their sons, their brothers, or members of their clan." (83, 22). And woe to music, dance and joy! Woe to love and long life to death! That is the war cry of those sects which court death.
Those verses are only a remake of the Deuteronomy : "If your brother, nephew, niece, your wife who rests on your chest, or the friend who is as yourself, incite you to serve other gods and not me, you must kill him; let your hand be the first to put him to death. Lapidate him, let him die... If iniquitous people serve other gods than Me, you will exterminate their town and you will slaughter all its inhabitants by your sword." (Dt, 13)
Forced into a destiny "attached to its neck" whose aim he ignores, the human being is now under surveillance to accomplish rituals which are empty of meaning, to cry out of rage and bitterness before this scorn of divine creation and this ontological incomprehension of the world. Let it be submissive, this bunch of scoundrels ever ready to rebel against Allah so that He " may send a messenger to warn them" and feel the pleasure to destroy them: "There is no city that we will not destroy and torment with the strongest torture before the Day of Resurrection. That was fixed in the Scriptures." (Co 17, 58)
The human being believed to be free: he is only an alien on this earth, a prostrated slave. But in his curse, he will have also to be wary of his best friend, who may be inhabited by a djinn; or of his son who will judge him not believer enough and who will send him to hell. He will have to see his mother and sister humiliated and struck, this sister which is soft, beautiful, loving, consoling, the only one which in fact deserves Allah's beautiful names. How difficult it is, the coranic demand which teaches to despise woman; to transform the mother, deity of our childhood, into an inferior creature, just waiting to people the hell...
And to crown all that, the very foundation of spirituality - compassion - is absent from Coran. Mercy, love, the thrust of the heart towards the one who suffers, the care towards the soul who is searching, are substituted by sinister vociferations. Ceaselessly, Allah is called merciful; but he never demonstrates mercy. In the description of ignorant redactors, he has become a conceited and cruel being. The most he can do is to accept servility as a proof of submissiveness; and his forgiving is only for doubts about his existence, since acts are secondary. At last, intoxicated with Himself, Allah falls in the supreme sin of pride, without any feeling for His own tragic destiny of a burning king. Thus blinded by his own glory, Allah takes the place of Lucifer. He went beyond is likes, such as Odon, Kali, Shiva, Nergal, Yahve, Satan, and ends up alone in the world.
Under the pretense of absolute submission, the Coran represents eventually God's murder, by rejecting Him outside humanity. So, these legend-makers who wrote it have been the root cause of innumerable crimes against the true Allah. That is why the Coran is received by the technique of overfeeding and stuffing memory; faith is not necessary because faith is a choice, whereas there, only submission is expected. We can notice that the end of the theological debate in Islam, in the 14th century, triggered a long lasting regression of this culture which had been able, by translating Greek and Persian authors, to reach the summits of civilization.



Reconquering Jerusalem!
[In 614, the last Persian emperor of the dynasty of Sassanides, Chosroes II, takes Jerusalem from the ruler of Byzance. He hands its administration onto the Jew, but they are so violent towards Christians that he has to remove it from their hands. In 630, the capital is taken again by Heraklios, the ruler of Byzance, to be lost a second time in 638. Meanwhile, the Jews had enrolled more and more Arabic tribes of mercenary and taken them on their side by having them believe the myth that they were descendant of Ishmael and thus that it was then their duty to reconquer Jerusalem, which had become in their new understanding their own holy land. Before, the Arabic tribes had nothing to do with this city. There were two groups, Ishmaelians and Agarenes, the latter were supposed to descend from Ishmael's mother and Abraham second wife, Agar. According to the historians specialists of this period, there has been a confusion of words, between hegirian, that is the migrants, and agarenes, Agar's descendants. These "migration" which was in fact of Arabic tribes into Syria and the West of Persia was interpreted much later as the one from Mecca to Medina, two towns which just did not exist in the 7h or 8th century according to historians. The group of Agarenes gave birth to the Shiites, while the Ishmaelians gave birth to the Sunnis Muslims : Ismaelian and Mussalman have indeed the same etymology.] They had been distinct right from the beginning, so the story of the early schism between the two is again another myth.

http://www.bernard-raquin.fr/index.htm


[/i]

_________________
"They must find it difficult...those who have taken authority as truth, rather than truth as the Authority." -- Gerald Massey, Egyptologist
http://www.myspace.com/skullnboner


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:22 pm 
Offline
Isis

Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:42 am
Posts: 1006
III - Jewish "Genies" Approve of the Koran



When Mohammed returned from Taif to Mecca, he went through Nakhla, and there he received – guess what! – a "Delegation of Genies". And of Jewish genies, for they were the genies that followed Moses:


"Mohammed was returning – [from Taif] – to Mecca, and stayed some time in Nakhla, when a Delegation of Genies arrived to hear the Koran. They were Mussa's (Moses's) followers and it was about them that the following verses of Surah Al-Ahkaf were revealed" (Chap. 46, verses 29-32 Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. pp118-119).


What can be understood by "Genies" in this text?


Were they spirits?


Were they similar to Aladdin's genie of the lamp?


Not likely, for it says that they were "genies" that followed Moses.


So, it is more appropriate to understand these "Genies", followers of Moses, as human beings, and very competent ones, that followed Moses' doctrine, that is, that they were Jewish rabbi that came to hear Mohammed and his revelation. After hearing Mohammed, they went back to their people – the Jews – to tell them what they had heard.


And after hearing the Koran being recited, what did these Jewish "Genies" conclude and what did they tell their people?


They concluded that they should invite tell the Jewish people to follow Mohammed:


"29. And when We inclined toward thee (Muhammad) certain of the jinn, who wished to hear the Qur'an and, when they were in its presence, said: Give ear! And, when it was finished, turned back to their people, warning."


"30 They said: O our people! Lo! we have heard a scripture which hath been revealed after Moses, confirming that which was before it, guiding unto the truth and a right road."


"31 O our people! respond to Allah's summoner and believe in Him. He will forgive you some of your sins and guard you from a painful doom."


"32. And whose respondeth not to Allah's summoner he can nowise escape in the earth, and he hath no protecting friends instead of Him. Such are in error manifest." (Koran, Surah Alahcaaf – The Dunes, Surah 46:29-32).


The result of Mohammed's examination by the "genies" of Israel – the Masters of Israel, the Rabbi – was approval, with the statement that the Koran confirmed the Torah.


And the rabbi ordered the Arab Jews to accept Mohammed as the Messiah promised by God, and to obey him.


All this, according to Aminuddin Mohamad is in the Koran, which is very interesting.


Aminuddin Mohamad warns that Surah 17 that talks about the Miraj that already prepared the Koraishite for the future departure of Mohammed to the city of Yaçrib, today's Medina:


Miraj was like a warning to the Koraishite that the time of persecution was about to end and that it was high time for the Prophet to emigrate and to the place he goes [sic], will deal with the Israelites. This is why the "Al-Isra" chapter (revealed in Mecca) already talked of Israelites, while in Mecca there were no Israelites, only in Medina there were a few tribes" (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 132. Our bold).


In 622, the Hijrah, or immigration – the Exodus – of Mohammed and his followers from Mecca to Yatreb took place, and this is why the city began to be called Medina, or the Prophet's city.


In this city and region lived the tribe of the Ansar.


But we will let the inconspicuous Aminuddin Mohamad talk:


"when the Auss and Khazrij [Arab groups of the Ansar tribe] arrived in Yaçrib, this area was heavily influenced by the Jews, since most of the population was illiterate" (…)


"Even though idolatrous, the Ansar, since they had lived among the Jews in Medina (Yaçrib), they had a certain idea about the Prophecy and the sacred books. And even though they were political rivals of the Jews, they recognized their religious virtue. The Jews had established Theology schools in Yaçrib, called Baltul-Madaris, where they taught the Torah.


"The Ansar were illiterate and this is why they were impressed by the theological superiority of the Jews. If the Ansar children's survival was threatened for whatever reason, they promised that "if the child survived, they would convert him to Judaism." Like the Jews, in general, the Ansar also believed that the last Prophet was about to appear" (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 133. Our bold).


So, isn't it unbelievable?


The Jews had even established theology schools in Yaçrib! And the Ansar, even being illiterate, had certain knowledge of the sacred Books, and the book is the Torah, that is the Pentateuch.


Evidently, Aminuddin Mohamad's Portuguese writing leaves much to be desired: the author meant that the Jews from Yatreb had established theology schools in this city, and that even the illiterate Ansar took an interest in the sacred books – the Torah and the Talmud, maybe – that is in the Jewish religion, and even promised that if their sickly children, if cured, would be converted to Judaism.


But: it is said that the Yatreb Jews were waiting for the last Prophet.


Certainly, these Jews of Medina were awaiting the arrival of the Messiah, for very soon.


So, great was the power and influence of the Jews in Yatreb, the city where Mohammed seeked refuge.


Very interesting.


Why were there so many Jews in Yaçrib?


Aminnudin provides several political reasons for this and ends by saying:


"Besides political motives in the arrival of Jews to Yaçrib, there were also religious motives; through the Torah, the Jewish theologians knew that the last Prophet would appear in Yaçrib. So the Jews settled there, to have the honor of following him, or his descendents."


"When Mohammed appeared as the last Prophet, Banu Quraiza said that his theologians had settled in Yaçrib due to these predictions.


"The Israelites had progressed a great deal and had expanded their influence to the areas around Yaçrib. They had their own government, wealth was in their hands, and the population grew and scattered all over the place and their best known centers were 'Khebar', 'Wadi Qura' and 'Timar'. (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 134. Our bold, in complete amazement!!).


So, were the Medina Jews awaiting the Messiah – the last Prophet – and they identified him as Mohammed?


And so, in Medina, where Mohammed fled to, the Jews had theology schools where they taught the Torah, and through the Torah they had calculated that the Messiah was coming? And he would arrive in Medina!


What cabalistic calculations were these?


So the Jews had the power, the wealth, and the government in Yatreb and its surroundings, and practically dominated the Ansar tribe, and it was precisely to that place the Mohammed fled?


And so, why is it that in Western history books there is nothing like what this most interesting Arab historian, Aminuddin Mohamad, tells us in such nonchalance?


If what Aminuddin Mohamad tells us, according to the Arab traditions, is true, why are Western historians silent about them?

IV - "The Case of the Jews" and "The reputation of the Awaited Prophet in Yaçrib"
(Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., pp. 134-135).


"The Jews of Yaçarib were awaiting the Prophet that would come to help them. The ruin of Auss and Khazirij, owing to a long time of wars, made them proud that soon they would conquer Yaçrib and the rest of Arabia and would destroy the idolaters just as they had destroyed the "Ád" and the "Iram". They told the Auss and Khazirij that the Prophet would come to conquer them."(…) "the Jews awaited the last Prophet, about whom the Torah had already spoken and even heralded his qualities and signs, but they were expecting that this last Prophet would come from among them (that is, a Jew), because up to that time, all the Prophets had been Jews. And since they had already lost prestige, they awaited the appearance of the last Prophet to join them and to fight against the idolatrous Auss and Khazirij, their rivals. However, when the last Prophet, long-awaited by them arrived, they rejected him for several reasons: first, because he descended from Ishmael and not Isaac. Another reason – according to the holy book of the Jews called the "Talmud"- because Mohammed confirmed Jesus' prophecy, and because the Jews considered Jesus an "impostor" and an illegitimate son, and anyone confirming an impostor was himself an impostor, they used the dirtiest and most insulting words on referring to Jesus and his mother in their sacred book, called the "Talmud", even though Jesus was also a Jew" (Aminuddin Mohamad, op cit., pp. 135-136).


We consider this text by Aminuddin Mohamad of capital importance in understanding Mohammed's case.


What is said in this text is that the Jews were awaiting the last Prophet, that is, that they were waiting for the Messiah.


The Jews had been waiting for the Messiah, for centuries, as they still are.


Several times, in their more then millenary history, the Jews have been wrong in identifying the Messiah as a certain historical character. The is how it was with Bar Kochba, in the 2nd century, when their mistake led to the definitive destruction of Old Jerusalem by Emperor Hadrian. The same happened in 1648, when they thought that Sabbatai Sevi was the long-awaited Messiah (Cfr. Gershom Scholem, Sabbatai Sevi, the Mystical Messiah, Princeton University Press, 1975).


Aminuddin's text explains that in Yaçrib, in the 7th century, there was a group of Jews – maybe a Jewish sect – that, pondering about the Talmud and the Torah, awaited the Messiah for soon and that, in the beginning, the "genies" of Israel – rabbis – identified him as being Mohammed. Would these Jews have been the ones who, initially, led by the "genies of Israel"- by some rabbis – introduced Mohammed as the "last Prophet", that is, as the Messiah of Israel, even though he was an Arab and not a member of the Jewish people?


That the Jews of Arabia, at Mohammed's time were awaiting the imminent arrival of the Messiah is confirmed by what is said by Bernard Lewis:


"For some Jews of that time, the Prophet's arrival in Arabia and the emergence of a new world power capable of breaking the hegemony of both Rome and Persia and of taking Jerusalem, the Holy Land, from under the heavy Byzantine domination, seemed to foretell the imminent realization of the Jewish prophecies and the arrival of the messianic era. Fragments of Jewish texts of the time, of an apocalyptic or any other nature, indicate the passion and the expectation raised by the first Arab victories. A piyyut (liturgical poem) written probably after the first Arab victories in Palestine, but before the capture of both Jerusalem and Caesarea, the provincial capital of Rome, serves as an example:


"Edomite and Ishmaelite will fight in the valley of Acre
"Until the horses submerge in blood and panic
"Gaza and her daughters will be stoned
"And Ascalon and Ashdod will be paralyzed by terror"


(Bernard Lewis, Judeus no Islã, Xenon ed., 1990, p. 90. Original edition, The Jews of Islam, Princeton University Press, 1916).


Aminuddin Mohamad goes on telling that…


"The Jews of Medina welcomed Mohammed and established an alliance with him in order to profit from his influence and power; however, the plan of God worked in another way.


"One of the wise men and priests of the Jews, called Abdallah Bin Salam embraced Islam, together with his whole family, because he knew and had read the holy texts where Mohammed's arrival and its signs were written. After his arrival, he soon recognized that that was the last Prophet that God had promised to send, and these promises were made to Moses (in the Old Testament) and to Jesus (New Testament).


The Jews, who had a lot of consideration and respect for Abdallah Bin Salam, still did not know that he had converted to Islam. A meeting was set with the Prophet Mohammed to receive the Jews. Abdallah Bin Salam was hiding. The Prophet received them at the set time and asked them: 'What position does Abdallah Bin Salam occupy among you?' The Jews answered: 'He is a noble man, the son of nobles; he is a priest and a wise man'. Then Abdallah Bin Salam appeared from behind a curtain where he was hiding and told them what he had done and invited them to join Islam. This did not in any way please the Jews that soon started making secret plans against Mohammed and were disturbed by his verbal disputes, just like their ancestors had done to Jesus, (six centuries before) after having recognized him as the authentic Prophet. History was repeating itself. And God, to warn the Jews and to inform the Muslims, revealed the second chapter of the Koran, verses 42 to 46, where God reminds the Jews of the favors granted them, telling them to keep the promise they had made to God through Moses, and that He would keep the promise He had made. Then God ordered them to believe in the Koran that came to confirm the sacred books that they had, and to know the truth and not be the first ones to reject it.


"God knew what was on their minds, and this is why he informed Mohammed and the Muslims what they were planning. The Jews were determined to play a double role. On one hand they said they were Mohammed's friends, and on the other, they had connections with non-believers, Mohammed's enemies. Their purpose was to exile Mohammed from Medina just as it had happened in Mecca. They told the prophet to stay in Jerusalem and to leave Medina as a station between Mecca and Jerusalem. The said that Jerusalem was home to all Prophets, and therefore the ideal was for Mohammed to stay in Jerusalem and not in Mecca or Medina. But soon God ordered him to change the Quibla from Jerusalem to Mecca, which enraged the Jews even more" (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., pp. 181-182. Our bold and underlining).


This long quotation was necessary, because it sheds light on the initial alliance and later separation of Jews and Muslims, because at least initially, the Jews supported Mohammed; later, at least some groups stopped supporting him as the last prophet of the Jews, that is, as their Messiah.


The fact that Mohammed was Arab would have caused some Jews not to accept him as the Messiah. They insisted that Mohammed became a Jew, making Jerusalem his capital, for Jerusalem was the capital of all the Prophets, and so it would be more dignified for Mohammed to live there than in Medina or Mecca.


They also demanded that the Quibla were Jerusalem and no other. This point was turned into a sine qua non condition:


"The Jews came to see the Prophet with the proposition that all of them would convert to Islam if he went back to praying to the Quibla of Jerusalem" (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p.187).


But when Mohammed changed the Quibla from Jerusalem to Mecca, many of them rejected him as a false prophet.


The definitive cause of rupture was after all, Mohammed's personal stance on the Quibla.


Undoubtedly, another critical point that had previously contributed to the divergence between the Jews and Mohammed had been Mohammed's position regarding Christ, accepting Him as a Prophet, but not as the incarnated God.


When Mohammed stated that Jesus Christ was a Prophet, the Jews started to stop considering him as the awaited Messiah. It was not enough for them that Mohammed rejected Jesus as the Son of God made man. They even refused to accept Jesus as a mere Prophet. These reasons would have led the Arab Jews to finally reject Mohammed as the awaited Messiah of Israel.


All this is in Aminuddin Mohamad's book.


All this explains the numerous coincidences between Muslim and Jewish practices, just as we will see later, the extremely large number of texts of Jewish origin in the Koran, verses copied from the Old Testament and from the rabbinic Midrashes.


Owing to this final rejection of Mohammed as the Messiah of Israel by the rabbis, Aminuddin Mohamad's book ends up by adopting a racist approach, violently anti-Semitic, as he writes:


"The criminal nature of the Jews is ancient. They always contradicted the Prophets, crushing them whenever they brought laws that went against their whims" (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. p. 136).


And to provide a foundation for this racist statement, that the Jews have a criminal nature, the author under study quotes Jesus' words against the Pharisee scribes.


Well, Jesus damned the scribes and Pharisees for their vices and doctrine but never the Jewish people for their nature, particularly because Jesus himself, the Holy Mary, and the apostles, were all Jews.


The Gospels are anti-Pharisaic and not anti-Judaic.


It is racist to assert that "the criminal nature of the Jews is ancient".


There is no criminal nature in the Jews of any other people, for that matter. In all peoples and races there are good and bad people. Aminuddin Mohamad's text incites racial hatred.


And the book under study goes on:


"The idolaters, even though they do not profess the same belief as the Jews, because they were ignorant, they were impressed by the constant mentioning of this awaited Prophet by the Jews, and it was this mentioning that paved the way for the conversion of the Ansar to Islam" (Aminuddin, Mohamad, op. cit. p. 136. Our bold and underlining).


The readers should note that this book distributed by the Centro de Divulgação do Islam para a América Latina confesses that, at least some Arab tribes only converted to Islam under the influence of the Arab Jews.


Why don't Western History books mention these data confessed in Islamic books?


Why would it be a taboo to study the origins of Islam under a historic perspective, something that we are doing in this brief historic study?


Then, when Mohammed started his contacts with the Arab tribes of Yaçrib they were ready to listen to him and to accept his preaching. This is why Aminuddin Mohamad says that:


"The Prophet, in turn, invited them – [the Ansar and the Khazirij] – to Islam, and recited the verses of the Koran to them. When they heard him, they looked at each other and said:


"The Prophet who we heard the Jews from Yaçrib talk about seems to be this one! Undoubtedly, what he recited is the truth. So, don't let the Jews join Islam before us; otherwise we will lose the honor of being the first ones". The Jews said to them: "A Prophet will be sent soon; his day approaches; we will follow him and kill you with his help, the same way as Ad and Iram were killed". They said this when there were disputes among them. But when the long-awaited for Prophet arrived, they rejected him for not being a Jew, according to the Koran:


"And when there comes to them a Book from Allah, confirming what is with them,- although from of old they had prayed for victory against those without Faith,- when there comes to them that which they (should) have recognized, they refuse to believe in it but the curse of Allah is on those without Faith" " (Koran, Surah 2: 89, Surah Al-Baqarat – The Cow, Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 138. The bold is ours).


So, the Jews promised, initially, to follow Mohammed, for they believed, at least in the beginning, that he was the Messiah awaited by Israel.


Later, other Masters of Israel forced the Judaic Messianic sect that had taken Mohammed as the awaited Messiah to reject him, because he descended from Ishmael, and was not an Israelite, even though Mohammed's Book – the Koran – confirmed what was in the Torah, that is, in the Bible.


And very sincerely Aminuddin Mohamad tells us that:


"The Ansar joined Islam immediately. This was in the tenth year of the Prophecy. This was the beginning of the Yaçarib Arabs' Islam.


"God had prepared the way for Islam, having them live side by side with the Jews, a learned people, cognizant of the writings, even though the Ansar were polytheists and idolaters" (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 138. Our bold).


So, according to the book "Mohamad, the messenger of God" by Aminuddin Mohamad, published by Centro de Divulgação do Islam para a América Latina, it was the Jews that prepared the Arabs to adopt Islam, a religion that confirmed what was in the Torah.


And this is a sensational acknowledgement, because it makes it very clear that Mohammed as a Prophet is a myth.


The ties between the Jews and Mohammed at that time were so strong that some of Mohammed's Arab followers feared that he would leave them and would join the Jews. At least this is what Aminuddin Mohamad tells us what Abdul Hathin Bin Taiham said to Mohammed:


"Oh! Prophet of God, between us and the Jews there are pacts that will be denounced. So, after this is done and God grants you success in your mission, you will go back to your people and abandon us?" (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. p. 144).


Finally, on September 13, 622, that is, on the 21st day of Rabyiul-Awwal, the people from Mecca surrounded Mohammed's house, who managed to escape to Yaçrib, which became Madinatul-Nabi, the Prophet's City. (Cfr. Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. p. 158).


Mohammed's going to Yaçrib – the Hijrah – marks the beginning of the Islamic calendar.


"Arabs and Jews – [from Yaçrib] – participated in the ceremony welcoming the Prophet, the true Prophet, the promised Prophet that would save the nations and lead them to victory. This great man has arrived" (Aminuddin Mohamad , op. cit., p. 159. Our bold).

_________________
"They must find it difficult...those who have taken authority as truth, rather than truth as the Authority." -- Gerald Massey, Egyptologist
http://www.myspace.com/skullnboner


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:35 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Posts: 2301
Location: Everywhere
I've always assumed that Mohammad had an actual historical existence.

But then again, I used to assume that Jesus, King David, Moses, Noah, Adam, etc. etc., all had historical existences as well. :wink:

I was certainly wrong on that assumption.

Perhaps Mohammed should be added to the long list.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:08 pm 
Offline
Isis

Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:42 am
Posts: 1006
Tat Tvam Asi wrote:
I've always assumed that Mohammad had an actual historical existence.

But then again, I used to assume that Jesus, King David, Moses, Noah, Adam, etc. etc., all had historical existences as well.

I was certainly wrong on that assumption.

Perhaps Mohammed should be added to the long list.


For the longest time that was my assumption also, tho I had long since rejected the Bible and it's characters as fictions. Then I had this creeping notion about Mohammed...why would he be any more historical than the others. I had never read any historical material that mentions this great leader of Arabia when I thought about it....only from Koranic and Arabic sources. Mainstream literature just assumes, without historical content outside of Arabs, that he existed as a real person.

Ok....Christopher Columbus next! Alright, he wasn't a prophet or religious icon, but he is a mystery legend historically! :lol:

_________________
"They must find it difficult...those who have taken authority as truth, rather than truth as the Authority." -- Gerald Massey, Egyptologist
http://www.myspace.com/skullnboner


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:37 pm 
Offline
Zeus
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:58 pm
Posts: 955
Location: Hub of the Empire
Acharya - you know what you have to do... :wink:

_________________
“It is discouraging how many people are shocked by honesty and how few by deceit. ”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 5:44 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 1:32 am
Posts: 1987
Location: U.S.A.
The way it's told, in college history classes, he was the founder of Islam, but some how I question that with all the craziness. Hey, guys, let's go name a teddy bear Mohammed just because. :lol:

_________________
Mriana

Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man. ~ Gandhi

Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is the goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other living beings, we are still savages. ~ Thomas A. Edison


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 6:05 pm 
Offline
Zeus
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:58 pm
Posts: 955
Location: Hub of the Empire
Well, Abraham, Moses and Jesus have been proven to be composite characters, so it would be odd if Mohammed actually existed.

Skullnboner - I would pay top dollar (Canadian, of course) if you wrote a book on this subject - you have just the right combination of skill, insight and a burning hatred for fools :wink:

_________________
“It is discouraging how many people are shocked by honesty and how few by deceit. ”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 6:49 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 1:32 am
Posts: 1987
Location: U.S.A.
Just as long as no one else causes me to feel like banging my head on the desk again today, I'm cool with anything that makes logical sense. :D

Quote:
And after hearing the Koran being recited, what did these Jewish "Genies" conclude and what did they tell their people?


They concluded that they should invite tell the Jewish people to follow Mohammed:


Guess they expected the Hebrews to continue whoring after gods. Image (Hey, Acharya said in her book at least once and I loved that description. :) )

Quote:
"Al-Isra"


On first glance, that looks like Israel scrambled with El changed to Al.

Quote:
So, isn't it unbelievable?


Huh? You're starting to do it now. :(

Something tells me these Jews did the same as the "Christian" Jews did. Took the Torah, Talmud, etc and made a new religion to brainwash the people.

Haven't seen any bizarre stuff in what you said, but I'm too exhausted to read it all after my day. :( If it's not mind-boggling then I'll finish reading it after I make dinner and feel more refreshed. :)

_________________
Mriana

Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man. ~ Gandhi

Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is the goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other living beings, we are still savages. ~ Thomas A. Edison


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 6:50 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5186
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Yeah, the Islam thing is touchy due to the special barbarism of certain Muslims who love to hand out death threats like giving out speeding tickets at the Indy 500 race track. There are others around who specialize in this area.

However, I did start a thread here titled, Islam & its Astrotheological connections

Basically just linking to this - http://www.truthbeknown.com/islam.htm

A quick excerpt from that article:

Quote:
Allah--Remake of the Moon Goddess

What this description means is that Judeo-Christian-Muslim tradition is built upon hoary myths, such that none of its offshoot religions can truthfully claim to be of divine or "inspired" origin. As concerns the god of Islam, Allah, Walker has this to say:

"Late Islamic masculinization of the Arabian Goddess, Al-Lat or Al-Ilat - the Allatu of the Babylonians - formerly worshipped at the Kaaba in Mecca. It has been shown that 'the Allah of Islam' was a male transformation of 'the primitive lunar deity of Arabia.' Her ancient symbol the crescent moon still appears on Islamic flags, even though modern Moslems no longer admit any feminine symbolism whatever connected with the wholly patriarchal Allah."

Indeed, the Koran verifies Allah's lunar or night-sky status: "Remember the name of our Lord morning and evening; in the night-time worship Him: praise Him all night long." (Q 76:23) And at Q 2:189: "They question you about the phases of the moon. Say: 'They are seasons fixed for mankind and for the pilgrimage.'"

In Pagan Rites in Judaism, Theodor Reik states, in a chapter called "The ancient Semitic moon-goddess":

"All Semites had once a cult of the moon as supreme power. When Mohammed overthrew the old religion of Arabia, he did not dare get rid of the moon cult in a radical manner. Only much later was he powerful enough to forbid prostration before the moon (Koran Sure 4:37). Before Islamic times the moon deity was the most prominent object of cults in ancient Arabia. Arab women still insist that the moon is the parent of mankind.

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:22 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Posts: 2301
Location: Everywhere
It does make more sense to consider that Mohammad is a legend just like the other non-historical figures.

One thing here about "El" and "Al" is that I've read a quote from Godfrey Higgins in "Anacalypsis", that Elohim has an older pronunciation.

It's called "Aleim".

Higgins was suggesting that it's a modern corruption to call Aleim Elohim. This certainly would mean that "El" is actually "Al". I don't know too much about this issue other than what I read in the quote.

"ieue-e-aleim" (Yahweh Elohim) means "The preserver, or the self-existent preserver".

Higgins goes on to say, "All this has a strong tendency to shew that the Jewish and Gentile systems were, at the bottom, the same".

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:03 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 1:32 am
Posts: 1987
Location: U.S.A.
Maybe I'm onto something then.

_________________
Mriana

Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man. ~ Gandhi

Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is the goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other living beings, we are still savages. ~ Thomas A. Edison


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:10 pm 
Offline
Isis

Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:42 am
Posts: 1006
Mr Bridger wrote:
Well, Abraham, Moses and Jesus have been proven to be composite characters, so it would be odd if Mohammed actually existed.

Skullnboner - I would pay top dollar (Canadian, of course) if you wrote a book on this subject - you have just the right combination of skill, insight and a burning hatred for fools :wink:


:lol: Oh come on...the word hatred is a little strong don't you think?!! How about contempt...or is that hatred too? ha ha! I think someone has already written that book as in the initial post and Acharya has pretty much covered similar sentiments.

It looks like I will find no argumentative evidence for the existence of Mohammed; even less than that claimed by Christians for Jesus Christ! I guess I was hoping for some kind of official historical investigation with arguements for and against his existence. I was just wondering what the arguement for would look like!

_________________
"They must find it difficult...those who have taken authority as truth, rather than truth as the Authority." -- Gerald Massey, Egyptologist
http://www.myspace.com/skullnboner


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 10:36 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Posts: 2301
Location: Everywhere
Skullnboner, maybe you should hit an Islamic forum and present them with this question. Their responses should give you the best understanding of what the pro-historical argument looks like.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:00 pm 
Offline
Isis

Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:42 am
Posts: 1006
Freethinkaluva22 wrote:
Yeah, the Islam thing is touchy due to the special barbarism of certain Muslims who love to hand out death threats like giving out speeding tickets at the Indy 500 race track. There are others around who specialize in this area.

However, I did start a thread here titled, "Islam & its Astrotheological connections" http://forums.truthbeknown.com/viewtopic.php?t=356

Basically just linking to this - http://www.truthbeknown.com/islam.htm

a quick excerpt from that article:

Quote:
Allah--Remake of the Moon Goddess

What this description means is that Judeo-Christian-Muslim tradition is built upon hoary myths, such that none of its offshoot religions can truthfully claim to be of divine or "inspired" origin. As concerns the god of Islam, Allah, Walker has this to say:

"Late Islamic masculinization of the Arabian Goddess, Al-Lat or Al-Ilat - the Allatu of the Babylonians- formerly worshipped at the Kaaba in Mecca. It has been shown that 'the Allah of Islam' was a male transformation of 'the primitive lunar deity of Arabia.' Her ancient symbol the crescent moon still appears on Islamic flags, even though modern Moslems no longer admit any feminine symbolism whatever connected with the wholly patriarchal Allah."

Indeed, the Koran verifies Allah's lunar or night-sky status: "Remember the name of our Lord morning and evening; in the night-time worship Him: praise Him all night long." (Q 76:23) And at Q 2:189: "They question you about the phases of the moon. Say: 'They are seasons fixed for mankind and for the pilgrimage.'"

In Pagan Rites in Judaism, Theodor Reik states, in a chapter called "The ancient Semitic moon-goddess":

"All Semites had once a cult of the moon as supreme power. When Mohammed overthrew the old religion of Arabia, he did not dare get rid of the moon cult in a radical manner. Only much later was he powerful enough to forbid prostration before the moon (Koran Sure 4:37). Before Islamic times the moon deity was the most prominent object of cults in ancient Arabia. Arab women still insist that the moon is the parent of mankind.


All of my trusted sources would agree with the summation above concerning the name for god and the moon-goddess worship of the so-called "Semites". L.A. Waddell prefers to call them "Chaldeans"(Kaldu) with not a lot nice to say about their form of worship. According to him, the attendant ritual associated with the Mother-Son moon-worshipping serpent/Lion-cult was human and animal sacrifice with their associated swarms of wizards and weirds terrorising the people. According to him, they were opposed to and by the Sun worshippers.

He says in the Indian epics and Vedas the first Aryan king bore as one of his titles "Aila" (in the Isin "Antediluvians" king list--[A]-lu-in). This title is interpreted by Sanskritists as a patronym or metronym of the First Aryan King as the "son of Ila" his reputed father or mother, the latter a title of Mother-goddess. It seems to be possibly derived from the Chaldean Ilu, "god", designating him as "The Son of God", a title used for him in later Sumerian literature, where he, beside being called Adar is also called Adamu, "the Son of God".

It's a bit of a different perspective, which I include here only for comparison. The thing I am getting from Waddell is that the Aryans were Patriarchal to an extent, while holding the female or Mother aspect with great reverence. Yet, they do not appear to be polygamists like the so-called Semites. Neither man took many wives, nor woman many husbands. The husband-wife and mother-father relationship was revered as equivalent even though the male was the primary external force.

The relationship might be compared to that of the Sun and the Moon in the astro-theological context and they saw "god" as aspects of both genders blended into one. Thus I see the "Al-Lat or Al-Ilat - the Allatu of the Babylonians" which Barbara Walker refers to as being later names of from the combination of earlier names for god bearing both the male and female aspect. (later Babylonia became overwhelmingly "Semitic" 1200 B.C., though a form of syncretism was being adapted much earlier).

In Mohammedism, I see the suppression of the moon aspect, because of it's identification with the feminine and the patriarchal element superimposing itself in the opposite direction as Acharya has noted, in contradistinction to the Aryans (which Waddell claims the so-called Sumerians were) and the previous Matriarchal system of the early so-called Semites. The moon symbol is still there because of it's role in the astro-theological context is played in the Sun-worshipping Aryans. Just an observation which may not have actual validity, but I am comparing and analyzing views.

_________________
"They must find it difficult...those who have taken authority as truth, rather than truth as the Authority." -- Gerald Massey, Egyptologist
http://www.myspace.com/skullnboner


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:07 pm 
Offline
Isis

Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:42 am
Posts: 1006
Tat Tvam Asi wrote:
Skullnboner, maybe you should hit an Islamic forum and present them with this question. Their responses should give you the best understanding of what the pro-historical argument looks like.


You sure I should do that Tat?! I might terrorise them....lol! I could probably find one, but do you know of one offhand?

_________________
"They must find it difficult...those who have taken authority as truth, rather than truth as the Authority." -- Gerald Massey, Egyptologist
http://www.myspace.com/skullnboner


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Truth Be Known | Stellar House Publishing
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Live Support