Changing of the Qiblah

His life, his examples and his psychology
User avatar
marduk
Posts: 1524
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 2:39 pm

Re: Changing of the Qiblah

Post by marduk »

Vulva was before I figured out that it's Allat's eye. The frame just happens to look like that.
User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11602
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: Changing of the Qiblah

Post by manfred »

You make your own reasearch but i will show you the way. In the pre-Islamic poems of Umayyah ibn Abi as-Salt, the haniffiya, the way of Ibrahim, is mentioned by name and Ibn Ishaq quotes it in connection with Abraha's attack on the Kaaba.
The general rule in discussion boards is if you make an assertion you have the burden of proof.

Umayyah ibn Abi as-Salt is a early supporter of Mohammed, so that does not answer the question. Ibn Ishaq, as you know was a Muslim historical writer, living some 100 years or so after Mohammed, so he does not fit the bill, either.What Muslims say and believe about the Kaaba is not the the question. We all know that already.

You claim that the Kaaba was a monotheistic shrine before Mohammed. There is no evidence for that at all.All you can show us is MUSLIM traditions that assert this idea, not evidence from the time before Mohammed.

You also claim that the Kaaba is connected with Abraham and Ishmael. Again there is no evidence for that, and not only that, it is extremely unlikely. But that is a different issue.

My question was if there were any Arabs living long before Mohammed who BELIEVED that somehow the Kaaba was connected to Abraham/Ishmael or even Adam, and that it was a shrine to a single God? You seem to suggest yes, that is the case. If you do, you need to show some evidence for that. Thanks.
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"
User avatar
marduk
Posts: 1524
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 2:39 pm

Re: Changing of the Qiblah

Post by marduk »

Thanks manfred, that's exactly it. Muslims SAY the Kaaba was built by Abraham and Ismael but that's just talk. I could say that the Pyramids were built by Noah. Would that make it so? I'm afraid that in the non-Muslim world we require some kind of supporting evidence for our claims, unlike in the Muslim world in which anything any Muslim leader says is automatically accepted as fact. You see, we're not brainless cult members who believe anything we're told by our masters.

If the Kaaba was built by Abraham and was as holy to God as Muslims would have us believe, we think it probably would have been mentioned at least once in the Torah or some Jewish scripture. The fact that neither the Kaaba or the stone is mentioned anywhere other than in Arabia pretty much proves conclusively that Muhammad was lying, wouldn't you think, eagle? Did God just forget about the holiest site on earth and the holiest stone from heaven? Then why shouldn't we do the same thing? Would he not have said to Moses "not Israel, stupid, Mecca. Go South after you get over the Red Sea, not northeast. The Temple is down there in Mecca and so is the sacred stone of Rigel"? Why send them to kill all those Canaanites when they could have just killed a few Arabs and took over all of Arabia?

I do commend you though, eagle, for at least making an attempt to rebutt the truth. That makes you more courageous than every Muslim scholar on earth.
Eagle
Posts: 2093
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:37 pm

Re: Changing of the Qiblah

Post by Eagle »

Sorry for reviving old threads, just noticed this reply of yours
manfred wrote:
You make your own reasearch but i will show you the way. In the pre-Islamic poems of Umayyah ibn Abi as-Salt, the haniffiya, the way of Ibrahim, is mentioned by name and Ibn Ishaq quotes it in connection with Abraha's attack on the Kaaba.
The general rule in discussion boards is if you make an assertion you have the burden of proof.

Umayyah ibn Abi as-Salt is a early supporter of Mohammed, so that does not answer the question. Ibn Ishaq, as you know was a Muslim historical writer, living some 100 years or so after Mohammed, so he does not fit the bill, either.What Muslims say and believe about the Kaaba is not the the question. We all know that already.

You claim that the Kaaba was a monotheistic shrine before Mohammed. There is no evidence for that at all.All you can show us is MUSLIM traditions that assert this idea, not evidence from the time before Mohammed.

You also claim that the Kaaba is connected with Abraham and Ishmael. Again there is no evidence for that, and not only that, it is extremely unlikely. But that is a different issue.

My question was if there were any Arabs living long before Mohammed who BELIEVED that somehow the Kaaba was connected to Abraham/Ishmael or even Adam, and that it was a shrine to a single God? You seem to suggest yes, that is the case. If you do, you need to show some evidence for that. Thanks.
Its not only Ummayah, there is also Jiran al-'Awd among other pre-islamic poets you will be left to make your own reasearch about. As for Umayyah, he was an early hanif who according to tradition did not become Muslim out of pride although he did admit he was not the foretold Arab prophet of past scriptures as he originally desired and finally conceaded that title to Muhammad. Although a disbeliever, the prophet Muhammad would later praise the wisdom shining through Umayyah's poems, as opposed to those of other poets that abounded in themes of sex and love romances, wine drinking, tribal hatreds and feuds, ancestry pride and vanity and made little or no mention of pure and noble themes. He used to say about Umayyah's poems that "His verse is a believer but his heart a disbeliever". He mentionned the hanifiya, "the way of Ibrahim" as he said and connected it with the Kaaba. Why would a non-Muslim fabricate such texts, before even the advent of the prophet Muhammad and why did nobody ever contend with such statements from the Quran?

Simply because there is no dispute about these issues well established in the mind of the Ishmaelites, Muslims and non-Muslims alike and this can be demonstrated as "highly likely" using your own Tanakh, contrary to what you seem to think
truthanvil.blogspot.com
User avatar
kaimana1
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:46 am

Re: Changing of the Qiblah

Post by kaimana1 »

Its not only Ummayah, there is also Jiran al-'Awd among other pre-islamic poets you will be left to make your own reasearch about. As for Umayyah, he was an early hanif who according to tradition did not become Muslim out of pride although he did admit he was not the foretold Arab prophet of past scriptures as he originally desired and finally conceaded that title to Muhammad. Although a disbeliever, the prophet Muhammad would later praise the wisdom shining through Umayyah's poems, as opposed to those of other poets that abounded in themes of sex and love romances, wine drinking, tribal hatreds and feuds, ancestry pride and vanity and made little or no mention of pure and noble themes. He used to say about Umayyah's poems that "His verse is a believer but his heart a disbeliever". He mentionned the hanifiya, "the way of Ibrahim" as he said and connected it with the Kaaba. Why would a non-Muslim fabricate such texts, before even the advent of the prophet Muhammad and why did nobody ever contend with such statements from the Quran?

Simply because there is no dispute about these issues well established in the mind of the Ishmaelites, Muslims and non-Muslims alike and this can be demonstrated as "highly likely" using your own Tanakh, contrary to what you seem to think

You are missing the point eagle- the sources of jiran al-'awd and ummayah come ONLY from islamic sources kapisch. The reason muhammad and possibly some pre-islamic arabs believed they were descended from ishmael was because the jews and christians of arabia told them that they were of abes seed. Plain and simple (some of the aus clans had converted to judaism 100 or 200 years prior to muhammad)
Eagle
Posts: 2093
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:37 pm

Re: Changing of the Qiblah

Post by Eagle »

kaimana1 wrote:the sources of jiran al-'awd and ummayah come ONLY from islamic sources
These are pre-islamic Arab records transmitted by later Muslim Arabs. You want to claim tampering, surely with all the literature available, from the embellishments to the worst calumnies surrounding the early days of Islam, you will surely find at least one Arab rejecting his people's ancestral origins to Ibrahim and Ismail in order to undermine the prophet Muhammad's ministry? Get to work.
kaimana1 wrote:The reason muhammad and possibly some pre-islamic arabs believed they were descended from ishmael was because the jews and christians of arabia told them that they were of abes seed.
Those silly Arabs probably were the only nation on earth to be so oblivious of their origins that some strangers managed to revise their entire family tree without them even raising an eyebrow
truthanvil.blogspot.com
User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11602
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: Changing of the Qiblah

Post by manfred »

These are pre-islamic Arab records transmitted by later Muslim Arabs.
These are Islamic writings claiming to report something from pre-Islamic times. As they would only do such a thing for a specific reason, the source need to be treated with extreme caution. There are just another of many Islamic rewrites of history.

You want to claim tampering, surely with all the literature available, from the embellishments to the worst calumnies surrounding the early days of Islam, you will surely find at least one Arab rejecting his people's ancestral origins to Ibrahim and Ismail in order to undermine the prophet Muhammad's ministry? Get to work.
This makes no sense either. Before Islam people would not reject anything that never even occurred to them. It is like saying find a medieval document rejecting that there were little green men on Mars who visit earth with spaceships.

It is not contended that Muslims BELIEVED in Mohammed's story of being descended from Ishmael. Many may have done. Others may have thought it wise to keep quiet.

The notion of being descended from Ishmael originates from contact with Jews and Christians who may have mentioned this fanciful idea to them them as it was a common medieval misconception, particularly in Nestorian circles.

Mohammed decided that he could use the idea to his advantage by writing himself into the line of prophets, so with the ever attentive help of his invisible friend Gabriel, he suddenly became a descendant of Ishmael.

As to why other Arabs did not argue... well, some thought Mohammed was quite mad anyway, others where scared of him.
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"
Eagle
Posts: 2093
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:37 pm

Re: Changing of the Qiblah

Post by Eagle »

Your kind, your people's task is very simple once more. You claim textual corruption then you need to prove it. Also there is a wealth of literature on the earliest days of Islam, ranging from the worst calumnies against the prophet of God to the reports depicting him as a god-man, yet in all this no trace can be found of a single Arab denying Muhammad's revision of an entire nation's ancestral origins?
truthanvil.blogspot.com
User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11602
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: Changing of the Qiblah

Post by manfred »

You keep referring to "your kind"... What "kind" are we?

I have already answered your point. You have pointed to a MUSLIM report of an alleged pre-Islamic source. It is fair to suspect that the "transmitter" added a little twist to suit his purpose, particularly because that is human nature and because many other such examples for Muslims revision of history are well known. So it is entirely reasonable to advise caution with such sources,as I have done. They do not qualify as a strong enough piece of evidence. If we had the original, it would be a different story.

I also answered why Muslims would not dare to debate or deny teaching of Mohammed.
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"
User avatar
kaimana1
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:46 am

Re: Changing of the Qiblah

Post by kaimana1 »

These are pre-islamic Arab records transmitted by later Muslim Arabs. You want to claim tampering, surely with all the literature available, from the embellishments to the worst calumnies surrounding the early days of Islam, you will surely find at least one Arab rejecting his people's ancestral origins to Ibrahim and Ismail in order to undermine the prophet Muhammad's ministry? Get to work.
Eagle the story of abraham and ishmael was a convenient anecdote to explain they were descended from the prophet (ibrahim) the concepts came from the jews specifically those jews and christians of arab descent before muhammad even the arab hanifs took the concepts of ibrahim from the jews and christians before muhammad- so why would even arab pagans deny this they didnt know who there progenitor was.

Those silly Arabs probably were the only nation on earth to be so oblivious of their origins that some strangers managed to revise their entire family tree without them even raising an eyebrow
Many nations on earth like for example many native american tribes claimed descent from bears and a myriad of other animals. the hawaiiaans claimed descent from the volcano .

You know why- because they are ignorant of their first ancestors coming from tahiti 2000 years earlier.

Many arabs loved the idea of being tied in with this jewish character abraham. Plain and simple
User avatar
Fernando
Posts: 4949
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 1:27 pm

Re: Changing of the Qiblah

Post by Fernando »

Why would anyone pray to anywhere other than where their god is? Praying to the Kaaba indeed implies that the Muslims' god is there. Whereas since Allah is supposed to be living in heaven, surely they should pray flat on their backs. Meanwhile, one has to ask whether the tops of their heads are pointing to a god in Mecca when they pray, or their faces are pointing downward to... something in the underworld?
‘Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs and literary traditions. They neither intermarry nor eat together, and indeed they belong to two different civilisations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions.’ Muhammad Ali Jinnah
Post Reply