Genesis 11:1-9
1. Now the whole world had one language and a common speech.
2. As people moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.
3. They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar.
4. Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”
5. But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower the people were building.
6. The LORD said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them.
7. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”
8. So the LORD scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city.
9. That is why it was called Babel —because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.
Beauty, Beauties On The Wall...
Could There Be "ONE" After All???
Beauty, Beauties On The Wall...
Whose The "Truest" Of Them All???
One God, One Word, One Acceptance, Oneness In God and In Languages...
Every child calls his father Dad or Papa. All fathers are different. Yet no children are confused as to whom their fathers are.
Although both Islam and Christianity believe in one God, their concepts of God differs. Islamic concept of God is a simple oneness while Christian concept of God is a complex oneness.
Muslims misunderstood Christian concept of God, thinking God physically gives birth to a son called Jesus. And Christians worship three gods. Nothing is further from the truth. However, this is not the appropriate place to explain the concept of Trinity.
Instead of burning bridges, Christians and Muslims must realise that Islam and Christianity share many common attributes of God. For example both religions believe that God is Almighty, All Loving, All Merciful, Omnipresent and so on.
Surat Al-Hujurat [49:13]:
O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of God is the most conscious of God of you. Indeed, God is Knowing and Acquainted.
Allah ruling causes controversy in Malaysia...
A Malaysian court has ruled that non-Muslims cannot use the word Allah to refer to God, even in their own faiths, overturning a 2009 ruling by a lower court.
The appeals court said the term Allah must be exclusive to Islam or it could cause public disorder.
Christians argue they have used the word, which entered Malay from Arabic, to refer to their God for centuries and that the ruling violates their rights. Jennifer Pak reports.
The conflicting interpretations of the ban have only added confusion to a debate that has inflamed religious tensions in the Muslim-majority country in recent years.
The editor of the the newspaper, the Herald, said it remains unclear what the implications of the court's verdict would be for the Christian community.
"We are in limbo," Father Lawrence Andrew told CNN.
In the Holy Qur’an Surah 42:13 it is implied that the divinely-revealed religions all stemmed from the same source. “He has ordained for you the same religion which He ordained for Nooh [Noah] … and which He ordained for Ibrahim [Abraham], Musa [Moses] and Esa [Jesus] saying you should establish religion and make no divisions in it”. “Every nation has its messenger”: Surah 10:47. “Nothing has been said to you save what was said to the messengers before you”: Surah 41:43.
Respect for all prophets: Plurality of prophets and multiplicity of revelations reflect a divine will. Islam is most respectful of previous monotheistic religions and holds their Prophets in great veneration (42:13, 2:136). The Prophets of all revealed religions are brothers and there is no difference between them with regard to the message. Muslims are obliged to believe in them all.
In Surah 2:136 it is stated: “We believe in Allah and that which has been sent down to us and that which has been sent down to Ibrahim [Abraham], Ismail [Ishmael], Ishaq [Isaac], Yaqoob [Jacob], and to Al-Asbaat [the offspring of the twelve sons of Yaqoob], and that which has been given to Musa [Moses] and Esa [Jesus], and that which has been given to the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims in submission to Him”.
The Split...
Key Points
After Muhammad ‘s death in 632 CE, his friend Abu Bakr was named caliph and ruler of the Islamic community, or Ummah.
Sunni Muslims believe that Abu Bakr was the proper successor, while Shi’a Muslims believe that Ali should have succeed Muhammad as caliph.
After Muhammad’s death and the rebellion of several tribes, Abu Bakr initiated several military campaigns to bring Arabia under Islam and into the caliphate.
The Rashidun Caliphate (632–661) was led by Abu Bakr, then by Umar ibn Khattab as the second caliph, Uthman Ibn Affan as the third caliph, and Ali as the fourth caliph.
Muslim armies conquered most of Arabia by 633, followed by north Africa, Mesopotamia, and Persia, significantly shaping the history of the world through the spread of Islam.
Key Terms
Sunni: The branch of Islam that believes that a caliph should be elected by Muslims or their representatives and that Abu Bakr was the first caliph.
Ummah: An Arabic word meaning “nation” or “community;” usually refers to the collective community of Islamic peoples.
Shi’a: The minority Islamic branch that believes Muhammad appointed his cousin Ali as his successor and that the caliph should be decided based on this family lineage.
caliph: The head of state in a caliphate, and the title for the ruler of the Islamic Ummah; a successor of Muhammad.
Forever and One
Succession after Muhammad’s Death
Muhammad united the tribes of Arabia into a single Arab Muslim religious polity in the last years of his life. He established a new unified Arabian Peninsula, which led to the Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphates and the rapid expansion of Muslim power over the next century.
With Muhammad’s death in 632 CE, disagreement broke out among his followers over deciding his successor. Muhammad’s prominent companion Umar ibn al-Khattab nominated Abu Bakr, Muhammad’s friend and collaborator. With additional support, Abu Bakr was confirmed as the first caliph (religious successor to Muhammad) that same year. This choice was disputed by some of Muhammad’s companions, who held that Ali ibn Abi Talib, his cousin and son-in-law, had been designated the successor by Muhammad at Ghadir Khumm.
Ali was Muhammad’s first cousin and closest living male relative, as well as his son-in-law, having married Muhammad’s daughter Fatimah. Ali would eventually become the fourth Sunni caliph. These disagreements over Muhammad’s true successor led to a major split in Islam between what became the Sunni and Shi’a denominations, a division that still holds to this day.
Sunni Muslims believe and confirm that Abu Bakr was chosen by the community and that this was the proper procedure. Sunnis further argue that a caliph should ideally be chosen by election or community consensus. Shi’a Muslims believe that just as God alone appoints a prophet, only God has the prerogative to appoint the successor to his prophet. They believe God chose Ali to be Muhammad’s successor and the first caliph of Islam.
Rise of the Caliphates
After Muhammad’s death, many Arabian tribes rejected Islam or withheld the alms tax established by Muhammad. Many tribes claimed that they had submitted to Muhammad and that with Muhammad’s death, their allegiance had ended. Caliph Abu Bakr insisted that they had not just submitted to a leader, but joined the Islamic community of Ummah.
To retain the cohesion of the Islamic state, Abu Bakr divided his Muslim army to force the Arabian tribes into submission. After a series of successful campaigns, Abu Bakr’s general Khalid ibn Walid defeated a competing prophet and the Arabian peninsula was united under the caliphate in Medina. Once the rebellions had been quelled, Abu Bakr began a war of conquest. In just a few short decades, his campaigns led to one of the largest empires in history. Muslim armies conquered most of Arabia by 633, followed by north Africa, Mesopotamia, and Persia, significantly shaping the history of the world through the spread of Islam.
The last days of the Prophet Muhammad S.A.W.
We are told the last days of the Prophet were spent at his favourite wife Aishah’s house. In the last moments of his life on earth, the Prophet summoned Ali to be by his side. As he lay on Aishah’s lap, and before he breathed his last breath, the Prophet was said to have whispered into Ali’s ear. And what the Prophet whispered into Ali’s ear is that after he has died he wants Ali to take over as the successor — Caliph, if in the Arabic language.
For three days the companions of the Prophet argued and debated. The Prophet has died. Who shall succeed him and hold the title of successor or Caliph? The successor must undertake the task of burying the Prophet. So, unless they resolve the thorny issue of the successor, the Prophet can’t be buried. And it is already three days since the Prophet died.
Ali informed the companions that the Prophet had personally whispered into his ear that he should be that successor. But Aishah, the only other person who would have witnessed this exchange, could not confirm that this was so. Some say she could not have heard it since it was whispered into Ali’s ear. Others say Aishah purposely withheld what she clearly knew because of personal differences with Ali.
The truth has since died with all those who had lived and died more than 1,400 years ago. But what can’t be disputed is that Ali never became that successor after the Prophet died. Abu Bakar did, followed by Omar and Osman. Ali did not get his turn until the three companions before him had left this world.
This version of history will be argued and debated until the end of time. And whether this was what happened is anyone’s guess. Millions will swear it did happen. Millions more will swear it did not. And, in the meantime, millions will die in Muslim versus Muslim conflicts because there are two interpretations of history.
It is reported that when Abu Bakar took over as the First Caliph of Islam soon after Prophet Muhammad’s death (S.A.W.), he was asked: how would the people of Medina be assured that he would be a just and righteous leader? It is further reported that in reply to this question, Abu Bakar removed his sword from his person and placed it before him on the floor and then said that if he ever deviated one iota from his duty then they were to take his own sword and end his life.
That was the example of Abu Bakar, the First Caliph of Islam whom Muslims believe was one of the four ‘Rightly-Guided’ Caliphs. And if Abu Bakar is believed to be Rightly-Guided then surely he knows what he is talking about and it can only be God and no other that had guided him. Would Abu Bakar then be wrong in what he said and could he have instead been Wrongly-Guided? No, no Muslim would ever believe Abu Bakar had been Wrongly-Guided. They will swear with their life that Abu Bakar had been Rightly-Guided and that it was no less than God that had guided him.
Abu Bakar was one of the Companions of the Prophet. Muslims believe he can do no wrong and that he had already been assured a place in heaven even before he died. Yet Abu Bakar not only asked the people of Medina to take him to task if he erred. He asked them to take his life with his own sword, the Sword of Islam. Can anyone lesser than Abu Bakar be expected to do less than this? If Abu Bakar should be killed with his own sword if he did not rule justly and righteously, should any lesser fate befall those lesser than Abu Bakar?
This is not what I say. This is what Islam says. And would Islam lie? Would Islam mislead us? Would the Holy Scriptures be in gross error? Abu Bakar should be killed if he was not just and righteous. Abu Bakar is not infallible. Abu Bakar is not perfect. Abu Bakar is only human. And as a mere mortal, as one who can easily err, Abu Bakar wants to suffer execution by his own sword. That is what is expected of a Ruler of the Muslim faith. And would anyone lesser than Abu Bakar be above this First Caliph of Islam?
Many people do many things all in the name of God. The irony is the very things which they do in the name of God are abhorred by God. Or even prohibited by Him.
History will show us that human beings have tortured, maimed and killed each other, all in the name of God. Untold misery and cruelty have been inflicted all in the name of God. Yet, when they speak of God and their religion, they insist that God is most merciful, most compassionate and most forgiving. And their religion is a religion of peace, justice and fairness.
In Islam for example, history would show us all that right after the passing of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w., Muslims started arguing on who would be the right candidate to be the Caliph. Then they started killing each other. Until now that is.
The Traditionalist was a loose grouping of mainstream conservative schools who called themselves ahli-sunnah-wal-jamaah (the proponents of the Prophet’s traditions and consensus). They posit that the Caliph should be elected by the influential members of the community. This was also generally accepted by another group, the Khawarij. The only difference between these two groups was that while the former narrowed the qualification to be a Caliph to just the Quraysh tribe (Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. was from the Quraysh tribe), the Khawarij did not have such qualification. The Khawarij in fact believed that a Caliph may even be removed if he breached his mandate.
This general agreement between the two groups however ended at the end of the reign of the 3rd Caliph, Uthman. His successor, Caliph Ali was met with opposition from the Khawarij as they did not agree with Caliph Ali’s compromise with the Shi’a.
"What we've got here is failure to communicate Some men, you just can't reach So, you get what we had here, last week Which is the way he wants it Well, he gets it And I don't like it any more than you men"
The Shi’a further narrowed the qualification for the Caliphate to the family members of the Prophet in particular, the Prophet’s son-in-law, Ali and his descendants. The Shi’a argued that the head of Islam, politically and religiously, being the most important position, must not be left to human consensus and determination and thus must be so restricted.
The irony of all these is that God has never ordained that only the Quraysh or the members of the Prophet’s family could be a leader in Islam.
Soon, of course, they started killing each other. After the 4th Caliphs, namely, Caliph Ali (the first 4 Caliphs in Islam are known as the “Rightly Guided Caliphs”), what originated as a deep political schism, imbued by misplaced tribal ego, resulted in vicious hatred when theological justification was used as political validation.
Soon after Caliph Ali, the so-called Islamic leadership or state was reduced into a dynasty, starting with the Ummayad. Caliph Mu’awiya started the Ummayad dynasty which lasted nearly a hundred years. The Abbasid dynasty replaced the Ummayad in Damascus. The slaughter of the Ummayad family in their palace during the “dinner of reconciliation” is well documented.
An Ummayad prince was saved from the slaughter when he was smuggled out from the palace. He ended in the Andalus and became Caliph in present-day Spain. Islam thus had two ruling dynasty, namely, the Abbasid ruling from Damascus and later, Baghdad and the Ummayad, ruling from Spain.
At this time, Islamic theology flourished, seemingly because of the Caliph’s thirst for knowledge and enlightenment. It was during this period – the so-called “Golden Age of Islam” that we saw the rise of “Ilm-al-kalam” (the science of debate).
What started as a political schism between the Khawarij, the traditionalist and the Shi’a groups over the right to become Caliph and to rule soon degenerated into a theological teasers that later further degenerated into an inquisition. It was at about this time that a the Mu’tazila or the Rationalists appeared.
In the Qur’an, chapter 12, verse 111, it says that what Allah (through Prophet Muhammad) is revealing (hence it is called the Revelation) is not a new message but a confirmation of the Scriptures before that. In fact, the Qur’an, in chapter 13, verse 39, suggests that all Scriptures come from a single book concealed in heaven called Umm al-Kitab or the Mother of Books.
Some scholars are of the view that the Qur’an is not an independent book or a book to be read in isolation but is a book that has to be read alongside the Torah and the Gospels. In fact, for the first 200 years of Islam, Muslims read both the Torah and the Qur’an together. The Torah was part of Islam (at least in the beginning). And hence it is not strange that Muslim customs, traditions and laws are similar to Mosaic customs, traditions and laws (except for the doctrine of the Trinity which the Qur’an specifically rejects and which is not James’s, the brother of Jesus Christ’s, teachings anyway).
Going by this, Islam accepts the earlier teachings of Moses and Jesus as part of the Abrahamic faiths or the Semitic religions. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are not three religions but three parts of the same religion. And Allah is the God of all ‘People of the Book’, not just the God of the Muslims. In that case, the Jews and Christians, too, can call their God by the name of Allah. In that case, also, why can’t the Christians use Allah in the Bible when Islam says that Allah is the God of the Christians and that the earlier Holy Books are also the books of Islam?
This argument is further strengthened in chapter 3, verse 84, of the Qur’an, which says:
Say: “We have believed in God, and that which has been sent down on us, and that which was sent down on Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and the Prophets who were raised in the tribes, and that which was given to Moses, Jesus, and all other Prophets from their Lord; we make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims.”
In this verse, the Qur’an clearly says that there is no distinction (difference, division, dissimilarity, etc.) between Islam and the teachings of Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Jesus, and all the earlier Prophets before Muhammad. Hence Allah is the God of all People of the Book since the beginning of time. Allah is not specific to just the Muslims and Islam does not have monopoly over Allah or over the name ‘Allah’.
No doubt Muslims believe that the Revelation (the Qur’an) is the final Revelation. But the Qur’an does not abrogate or replace the earlier Revelations or previous Scriptures. The Qur’an just makes them complete. Hence the Qur’an can be regarded as Version 3.0 of the earlier Scriptures that we can call Version 1.0 and Version 2.0 if you wish.
The Qur’an makes many references to ahl al-Kitab (ahli kitab in Malay) or ‘People of the Book’. And Islam allows Muslims to eat meat from animals slaughtered by the ahli kitab. In other words, meat from animals slaughtered by Jews and Christians is halal. You do not need Muslims to slaughter a cow or chicken before you can eat that meat.
Some Muslims (in particular the Malays) will argue that only Muslims will go to heaven and kafir (infidels) will go to hell. The Qur’an disagrees with this. In chapter 5, verse 69, of the Qur’an, it says:
Surely, be they of those who declare faith, or be they of those who are the Jews or the Sabaeans or the Christians – whoever truly and sincerely believes in God and the Last Day and does good, righteous deeds – they will have no fear, nor will they grieve.
Where does it say only Muslims go to heaven and that the other People of the Book are infidels? It says: whoever truly and sincerely believes in God and the Last Day and does good, righteous deeds… will have no fear, nor will they grieve. And it mentions the Jews, the Sabaeans and the Christians.
The problem is, because of the later wars between the Christians and the Muslims (in particular during the Crusades) the other People of the Book came to be regarded as infidels. This was how later Muslims came to view things. This is not how the Qur’an sees it. But because most Muslims do not really follow the Qur’an but follow later ‘traditions’, their perspective of the other People of the Book changed over time. This is also true regarding the real meaning of Jihad
It's My Way Or The Highway; Cause I Want It That Way!!!
Languages - What's In A Word of Diverse Interpretation... (DOME OF THE ROCK)
The Dome of the Rock is a shrine or memorial located on the Temple Mount in the Old City of Jerusalem. It was built by the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik and was completed in AD 691.
The Temple Mount, known in Hebrew (and in Judaism) as Har haBáyith and in Arabic (and in Islam) as the Haram Ash-Sharif (al-haram al-qudsī ash-sharīf means Noble Sanctuary), is one of the most important religious sites in the Old City of Jerusalem. It has been used as a religious site for thousands of years. At least four religions are known to have used the Temple Mount as their holy site: Judaism, Islam, Christianity, and Roman paganism.
The inscriptions on the Dome of the Rock can be seen below. The two ‘key words’ in those inscriptions would be “Islam” and “Muhammad”. Hence, going by these two key words, the Dome of the Rock is believed to have been built by a Muslim — the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik — and it is further believed to have been built as a shrine or memorial to the Prophet Muhammad, the prophet of Islam.
In Arabic, the word “Islam” means “submission” or “surrender”, which is derived from the root word “salam”. From this root word, you can also derive the words “peace” and “safety”. Many people feel that Islam implies some sort of “enslavement to Allah”, but others find it more viable to define the word “Islam” as “surrender”.
The word “Muhammad” is derived from the Arabic root word “hamd” or “praise”. It is the emphatic passive participle of that root and can be translated as “the Oft-Praised One”. As for “Ahmad”, it is the superlative form of the same root word “hamd”, which means “the Highly Praised One”.
If you were to interpret the word “Islam” as “submission” or “surrender” and the word “Muhammad” as “the praised one”, then the inscriptions will take on an entirely different meaning.
Western scholars are beginning to question whether the Dome of the Rock is a memorial to the Prophet Muhammad or a memorial to Jesus Christ. For example, “Muhammad is the Messenger of God, the blessing of God be on him” can also be interpreted to mean: “The praised one is the Messenger of God, the blessing of God be on him”. “Muhammad is the servant of God and His Messenger” can also be interpreted to mean: “The praised one is the servant of God and His Messenger”.
Is There Perfection In Existence???
Now, assuming that the “Muhammad” in the inscription does not refer to Muhammad the person (the proper noun) but refers to “the praised one” (an adjective), whom, therefore, are they referring to? If you were to look at the other parts of the inscription, it talks about “The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a Messenger of God”. Then it goes on to say: “It befitteth not God that He should take unto Himself a son” and “There is no god but God”.
Scholars believe that this is evidence that the inscription is not talking about Prophet Muhammad but about Jesus Christ and that this ‘doctrine of faith’ is meant to counter or dispute the Christian dogma that Jesus is the Son of God and the Lord (Jesus) — and that Jesus was merely a messenger or prophet of God.
If these scholars are correct in their assumptions, this throws a whole new light on the more than 1,000-year-old conflict as to who owns this holy site. Was this structure built as a memorial to Prophet Muhammad or to Jesus Christ? And if it is a memorial to Jesus Christ, was it built to counter the Christian dogma of the Holy Trinity and present Jesus as a mere mortal and messenger/prophet of God rather than the Lord and Son of God?
Losing My Religion...
This is certainly a very interesting hypothesis and quite difficult to dismiss without further examination. The fact that the inscription talks about Jesus and the “Muhammad” in the inscription, if translated to “the praised one”, can also be referring to Jesus gives credence to this hypothesis.
Nevertheless, it will be very difficult for most people to accept this hypothesis as a possibility considering that for more than 1,000 years people have held on to a certain belief and now you are asking them to rethink this whole thing. You are also telling them that for more than 1,000 years what they believed may not have been correct after all.
One more ‘troubling’ thing about this hypothesis is that Caliph Abd al-Malik was supposed to be a Muslim. Therefore, if he had built this as a shrine for Jesus Christ rather than Prophet Muhammad, does this mean the Caliph was not a Muslim but a Christian? This would be the most difficult question facing Muslims who may choose to consider this hypothesis as a possibility.
I suppose this is why the Muslim ulama’ say you must not think too much because too much thinking may confuse you and lead you astray. Hmm…maybe I should stop thinking about this then.
To Be a Better Man... Truly a Beauty tat deserves a #better man but not the Best Man for only the best man wins to be the better man. Yeah!!! #betterman
S: In the name of God, the Merciful the Compassionate. There is no god but God. He is One. He has no associate. Unto Him belongeth sovereignity and unto Him belongeth praise. He quickeneth and He giveth death; and He has Power over all things. Muhammad is the servant of God and His Messenger.
SE: Lo! God and His angels shower blessings on the Prophet. O ye who believe! Ask blessings on him and salute him with a worthy salutation. The blessing of God be on him and peace be on him, and may God have mercy. O People of the Book! Do not exaggerate in your religion
E: nor utter aught concerning God save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a Messenger of God, and His Word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in God and His messengers, and say not ‘Three’ – Cease!
NE: better for you! – God is only One God. Far be it removed from His transcendent majesty that He should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And God is sufficient as Defender. The Messiah will never scorn to be a
N: servant unto God, nor will the favoured angels. Whoso scorneth His service and is proud, all such will He assemble unto Him. Oh God, bless Your Messenger and Your servant Jesus
NW: son of Mary. Peace be on him the day he was born, and the day he dies, and the day he shall be raised alive! Such was Jesus, son of Mary, a statement of the truth concerning which they doubt. It befitteth not God that He should take unto Himself a son. Glory be to Him!
W: When He decreeth a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! and it is. Lo! God is my Lord and your Lord. So serve Him. That is the right path. God is witness that there is no God save Him. And the angels and the men of learning. Maintaining His creation in justice, there is no God save Him,
SW: the Almighty, the Wise. Lo! religion with God Islam. Those who received the Book differed only after knowledge came unto them, through transgression among themselves. Whoso disbelieveth the revelations of God lo! God is swift at reckoning!
S: In the name of God, the Merciful the Compassionate. There is no god but God. He is One. He has no associate. Say: He is God, the One! God, the eternally Besought of all! He begetteth not nor was begotten. And there is none comparable unto Him. Muhammad is the Messenger of God, the blessing of God be on him.
SW: In the name of God, the Merciful the Compassionate. There is no god but God. He is One. He has no associate. Muhammad is the Messenger of God. Lo! God and His angels shower blessings on the Prophet.
W: O ye who believe! Ask blessings on him and salute him with a worthy salutation. In the name of God, the Merciful the Compassionate. There is no god but God. He is One. Praise be to
NW: God, Who hath not taken unto Himself a son, and Who hath no partner in the Sovereignty, nor hath He any protecting friend through dependence. And magnify Him with all magnificence. Muhammad is the Messenger of
N: God, the blessing of God be on him and the angels and His prophets, and peace be on him, and may God have mercy. In the name of God, the Merciful the Compassionate. There is no god but God. He is One. He has no associate.
NE: Unto Him belongeth sovereignty and unto Him belongeth praise. He quickeneth. And He giveth death; and He has Power over all things. Muhammad is the Messenger of God, the blessing of God be on him. May He accept his intercession on the Day of Judgment on behalf of his people.
E: In the name of God, the Merciful the Compassionate. There is no god but God. He is One. He has no associate. Muhammad is the Messenger of God, the blessing of God be on him. The dome was built by servant of God ‘Abd
SE: of the Faithful, in the year two and seventy. May God accept from him and be content with him. Amen, Lord of the worlds, praise be to God.
OMG!!!! The Future Of Heaven On Earth... (FUTURE WORLD)
For Only In Robots It Will Stay Young, & To Be Of Virgin Forever With Full of Happiness & Joy to go around with 72 varieties...
Forever Young... #foreveryoung #forever #young
Some are like water, some are like the heat Some are a melody and some are the beat Sooner or later they all will be gone Why don't they stay young? Forever Young I want to be Forever Young!!! Do you want to be forever young? Forever or Never...
Heaven is A Distance Away & One needs to go thru Death to reach it.... But ideally bringing Heaven on Earth Is to put forth Robotic Technology Here On Earth so as to be Made A Slave to the Creator... To Submit to Its Creation... Hell Yeah!!! #heaven #heavenonearth #earth
Is This the World's Most Contested Religious Site? | The New York Times
It Gets Holier Upon The Death Of The Prophet...
In Mekah, you have both the Ka’aba and the Grand Mosque. In Medina, you have the Prophet’s tomb and the Prophet’s Mosque. And in Jerusalem, ‘the Farthest Mosque’ and the Dome of the Rock.
The main bone of contention that is to be noted is that all these structures were built after the death of the Prophet Muhammad.
I suppose the issue of when the mosque in Jerusalem was built is crucial to Muslim belief, just like the story of the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus. The Muslims dispute the story of the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus. The Muslims say it never happened and that someone else who looked like Jesus was crucified instead. Hence, since there was no Crucifixion, then there was no Resurrection as well.
The story of the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus is the foundation of Christianity. If it did not happen then there is no Christianity. If the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus is a lie then Christianity itself is a lie. Hence to dispute the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus is to dispute the existence of Christianity.
And Islam disputes the story of the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus.
In that same spirit, Prophet Muhammad’s Night Journey is crucial to Islam. That story, too, is crucial to the existence of Islam. If that story is disputed then it opens Islam itself to question. It is very important, therefore, that the Muslims defend the story of Prophet Muhammad’s Night Journey.
But then, a point to ponder is if the Jerusalem mosque did not exist yet at the time of the Prophet, and if it was built by Umar after the death of the Prophet, then how credible would the story of the Night Journey be when Muhammad was supposed to have travelled to Jerusalem, up to heaven to meet God, and home again, all in the same night? And it was at this time that Muhammad received the command for Muslims to pray five times a day.
It's Just Another Brick In The Wall...
Hence, for the Christians, they have the story of the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus. And, for the Muslims, they have the story of the Prophet’s Night Journey from the Jerusalem mosque up to heaven. Without these two stories Christianity and Islam would not exist.
Hence, also, it is understandable that the Christians will get angry when you dispute the story of the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus just as the Muslims will get angry if you suggest that the mosque in Jerusalem did not exist yet at the time of the Prophet. And if you dispute any or both these stories they will say it is a Jewish conspiracy because if the Bible and/or the Qur’an says that something had happened then it did happen, even if the archaeologists and historians say otherwise.
Basically, religion is all about faith and you need faith to believe that Jesus died and came back to life three days later and that Muhammad flew 1,200 kilometres to Jerusalem and then up to heaven to meet God in just one night. And people who have faith and believe in this do not like those who do not to dispute what they believe and to suggest that what they believe may not be right.
Flying Horse...
A Unity In Diversity (ONENESS By Stone)
Narrated 'Abis bin Rabia:
'Umar came near the Black Stone and kissed it and said "No doubt, I know that you are a stone and can neither benefit anyone nor harm anyone. Had I not seen Allah's Apostle kissing you I would not have kissed you."
What is absolutely clear from this particular Hadith is the fact that even Caliph Umar was completely oblivious as to 'why' the Prophet had kissed the Black Stone. His sentiments with regards the veneration of an object not being able to benefit or harm one are mirrored by a similar argument made by Prophet Abraham (pbuh) to his pagan forefathers and community.
Whether extreme veneration can be considered a form of worship is not the focus here. However, what is questionable is the practice of showing any form of veneration to something which can neither benefit one nor harm one.
021:66-67
"He (Abraham) said: What! do you then worship, besides God what brings you not any benefit at all, nor does it harm you? "Fie upon you, and upon the things that you worship besides God! Have ye no sense?"
An important question arises. Did Caliph Umar understand the spirit of Islam better than Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who himself was told to emulate the ways of Prophet Abraham (pbuh) (16:123)? Was Caliph Umar better aware of the general sentiments imparted by Prophet Abraham (pbuh) than Prophet Muhammad? (pbuh)
Or is a more significant question, was this a practice that the Prophet never actually performed but was invented after his demise and then later given sanction and legitimacy by projecting a Hadith back as a saying of a companion?
The Quran provides detailed information with regards Hajj rituals (e.g. 2:125; 2:158; 2:189; 2:196-203; 3:96-97; 22:26-37; 48:27). it even includes guidance with regards the nature of expiation if certain Hajj rituals are not followed (2:196). It provides details of what is prohibited and what is acceptable in a state of 'Ihram' (Note this is a state and not necessarily a reference to a particular garb). (5:1, 5:95) However, one finds no mention of a Black Stone.
The affiliation of pagan Arabs with stones is deep rooted and this can indeed be attested by the Quran.
005:003 (Part)
"Forbidden to you... that which is sacrificed on stone altars (Arabic Nusubi)..."
005:090 (Part)
"...Stone altars (Arabic: Ansabu) ... (are an) abomination from (the) work of Satan..."
Muhammad (PBUH): Muhammad (PBUH) is credited with setting the Black Stone in place in the wall of the Kaaba. A story found in Ibn Ishaq's Sirah Rasul Allah tells how the clans of Mecca renovated the Kaaba following a major fire which had partly destroyed the structure. The Black Stone had been temporarily removed to facilitate the rebuilding work. The clans could not agree on which one of them should have the honour of setting the Black Stone back in its place.They decided to wait for the next man to come through the gate and ask him to make the decision. That individual happened to be the 35-year-old Muhammad, five years before his prophethood. He asked the elders of the clans to bring him a cloth and put the Black Stone in its centre. Each of the clan leaders held the corners of the cloth and carried the Black Stone to the right spot. Then Muhammad himself set the stone in place, satisfying the honour of all of the clans.
Kissing Them Stone...
Islamic tradition holds that the stone fell from Heaven to show Adam and Eve where to build an altar, which became the first temple on Earth. Muslims believe that the stone was originally pure and dazzling white, but has since turned black because of the sins of the people.According to a prophetic tradition, "Touching them both (the Black Stone and al-Rukn al-Yamani) is an expiation for sins." Adam's altar and the stone were said to have been lost during Noah's Flood and forgotten. Ibrahim was said to have later found the Black Stone at the original site of Adam's altar when the angel Jibrail revealed it to him. Ibrahim ordered his son Ismael — who is an ancestor of Muhammad — to build a new temple, the Kaaba, in which to embed the Stone.
A hadith records that, when the second Caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab (580-644) came to kiss the Stone, he said in front of all assembled: "No doubt, I know that you are a stone and can neither harm anyone nor benefit anyone. Had I not seen Allah's Messenger [Muhammad] kissing you, I would not have kissed you."However, in the hadith collection Kanz al-Ummal by Ali ibn Abd-al-Malik al-Hindi, it is recorded that Ali responded to Umar, saying, "This stone (Hajar Aswad) can indeed benefit and harm.... Allah (swt) says in Quran that he created human beings from the progeny of Adam (as) and made them witness over themselves and asked them, 'Am I not your creator?' Upon this, all of them confirmed it. Thus Allah wrote this confirmation. And this stone has a pair of eyes, ears and a tongue and it opened its mouth upon the order of Allah (swt), who put that confirmation in it and ordered to witness it to all those worshippers who come for Hajj."
Muhammad Labib al-Batanuni, writing in 1911, commented that the pre-Islamic practice of venerating stones (including the Black Stone) arose not because such stones are "sacred for their own sake, but because of their relation to something holy and respected." The Indian Islamic scholar Muhammad Hamidullah summed up the meaning of the Black Stone:
[T]he Prophet has named the (Black Stone) the 'right hand of God' (yamin-Allah), and for purpose. In fact one poses there one's hand to conclude the pact, and God obtains there our pact of allegiance and submission. In the qur'anic terminology, God is the king, and ... in (his) realm there is a metropolis (Umm al-Qurra) and in the metropolis naturally a palace (Bait-Allah, home of God). If a subject wants to testify to his loyalty, he has to go to the royal palace and conclude personally the pact of allegiance. The right hand of the invisible God must be visible symbolically. And that is the al-Hajar al-Aswad, the Black Stone in the Ka'bah.
In recent years, however, literalist views of the Black Stone have emerged. A small minority accepts as literally true an allegorical hadith which asserts that "the Stone will appear on the Day of Judgement (Qiyamah) with eyes to see and a tongue to speak, and give evidence in favor of all who kissed it in true devotion, but speak out against whoever indulged in gossip or profane conversations during his circumambulation of the Kaaba".
PONDER UPON THE KISSING OF ROBOTS!!!
FINAL THOUGHTS
Practices that are not sanctioned by the Quran but are legitimised as having a religious connotation must be seriously questioned in light of God's scripture. Kissing the Black Stone or showing any form of veneration to it is no different.
Otherwise, (we) Muslims would appear no different from others that simply follow their religious doctrines blindly as inherited by their forefathers whom Muslims are usually found to criticise. Muslims have been given clear guidance from the Quran. They have been granted the faculties to ponder, think and analyse. The instruction to research and reflect is clearly given by the Quran (Tadabbur).
004.082
“Why don't they research (Arabic: Yatadabbaruna) the Quran? and if it had been from someone other than God, they would surely found many discrepancies / contradictions in it!”
Alas, very few wrestle with the Quran's verses to understand what God has actually said to them. Most, sadly uncritically follow the opinions of men, many of which follow their own sects and creeds simply passing on the baggage of non-Quranic theology from generation to generation.
Is the kissing of a stone object or any form of such veneration really in line with the spirit of the Quran and monotheistic belief that demands worship of an unseen God? Or is this a Pagan practice that has been legitimised in the name of Islam?
This is something seriously worth pondering.
007:016-17 (Part)
"...I will certainly lie in wait for them in Thy straight path. Then I will assault them from before them and behind them, from their right and their left: Nor will you find, in most of them, gratitude (for thy mercies)"
004:118-119 (Part)
"...and he said "Most certainly I will take of Your servants an appointed portion: I will surely mislead them, and I will create in them false desires; I will order them to slit the ears of cattle, and to deface the creation of God..."
“The Black stone descended from paradise, and it was more white than milk, then it was blacked by this sins of the children of Adam.” [Tirmidhi]
“By Allah! On the Day of Qiyamah, Allah will present the Hajar al-Aswad in such a manner that it will have two eyes and a tongue to testify to the Imaan (faith) of all those who kissed it.” [Tirmidhi]
“The Hajr al-Aswad and al-Maqam (Ebrahim) are two jewels from the jewels of Paradise. Had Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) not concealed their radiance, they would illuminate everything between the East and the West.” [Tirmidhi]
Submit or Die!!!
Practitioners of organised religions regard their beliefs as the indisputable truth. Any disagreement with their belief is regarded as a violation of God’s wishes. It is a declaration of war that needs to be met with a hostile and at times a physical response. It is God’s punishment on man by fellow man who acts in the best interest and as a legitimate representative of God.
Who appointed them as the legitimate representative of God? Did God officially and legally appoint them? What are their credentials and do they posses any testimonial as evidence that God had legally and officially appointed them as this legitimate representative?
They do not need any legal or official appointment, or any testimonial to confirm this appointment. They speak on behalf of God by the mere fact that they follow God’s commands. They are the faithful and their faithfulness is the only testimonial that they need. They are, after all, self-appointed and their legitimacy comes from the fact that they are the faithful.
Hence their belief is called faith. And those who follow this belief are called the faithful. And those who reject this belief are called the unfaithful. They are the infidels — the non-believers, the disbelievers, the atheists, the rejecters, the heathens, the gentiles, the pagans, the heretics, the non-worshippers, and all sorts of words to describe those who do not follow God’s commands and do not deserve to be allowed to live.
Unfaithful comes from not being faithful, basically not being faithful to your faith. It is the breaking of the covenant, your covenant with God. But when did you enter into this covenant with God?
You entered into your covenant with God the instant you were born into this world. That was the agreement between you and God. God gave you life and you, in turn, would be faithful to this God that gave you life. Hence, if you break this covenant, then you no longer deserve to live.
You have broken the agreement to obey God. So God, too, can break the agreement by taking back the life He gave you. And man, who represents God as His legitimate representative on earth, will deliver this punishment to those who break their covenant with God.
Hence you break this agreement at your own peril. You violate God’s commands at the risk of losing your life because you no longer deserve to live. You broke the agreement so God, too, can break the agreement. And your agreement was to obey God in exchange for the life that God gave you. So, while you can take back what you gave God — your promise to obey God — God, too, can take back what He gave you — your life.
And that is why, for thousands of years, man kill fellow man whenever they do not keep their side of the bargain that they made with God. And this is perfectly legal and justified because promises to God must never be broken. You take back what you promised God and God, through man, can take back what He gave you. You disobeyed God so you must die....
The moon was split in two, or was it? and I haven't even talked about the extreme impacts that this would have on our planet. #moonsplit
I Believe In Woman My Oh My...
You Need To Have Some Fun, Before You Decay...
So Adam, What did You Say??
All Creation Is An Act Of Love For All Creation Is A Beauty of The Creator...
But She Wanna Go Home... "Stay With Me, Stay With Me!!!"