Mohammed: the origins of Islam
II – The World in Mohammed’s Time
- "Moral and Social Contexts"
- "The Story of the Cut in Mohammed’s Chest"
- "The Prophet’s Marriage to Khadija"
- "Those Who Had Some Knowledge About the Prophets"?
- Mohammed’s Satanic Verses in the Koran
III – Jewish "Genies" Approve of the Koran
IV - "The Case of the Jews
"and" The Reputation of the Awaited Prophet in Yaçrib"
- "The Jews of Medina and the Peace Treaty with Them"
- The Quibla is Turned to Jerusalem
- The Jews Break their Agreement with Islam – Some Jews Conspire Against Mohammed’s Life
- The Siege of Medina, or the Battle of the Ditch
- The End of Banu Qurayza
Reader’s Letter Sent on May 30, 2003
Re: Mythology of Redemption and Crucifixion
Professor, Good Morning!
I would like to congratulate you for all the work done in clarifying Catholics on matters of faith.
I read an “article” on the Mythology of Redemption and would like to know if you could provide clarification on this, since it involves more than just the widely known Mazdeist mythology. The text copied is pasted below:
In the name of Allah, the most Graceful, and the most Merciful
Destroying the Mythology of Christ’s Redemption and Crucifixion, by Karls Eduardo
The idea of redemption through the suffering and death of a divine Savior could already be found in almost every religion, prior to Christianity. For example: In China, one of the five sacred books (that are much older that Christianity) called “Y-Rei”, mentions a redemptory hero called “Tien, the Saint”: “The Saint will gather in him all the virtues of Heaven and Earth. By his justice the world will be reestablished into the ways of rectitude. He will work hard and will suffer much. He will have to go through the huge current whose waves will penetrate his soul, but only he will be able to offer God a sacrifice worthy of Him”. [Prog. Relig. Idéias, vol. I, p.211]
An ancient commentary on the Chinese savior “Tien, the Saint” says: Common people sacrifice their lives for bread; philosophers for reputation; noblemen for their family’s perpetuation. The Saint (Tien) does not seek (his own good), but rather the good of others. He dies to save the world” [Ibid.]
What is mentioned above is only an introduction. What we will see from now on is how the creators of Christian mythology based themselves on prior myths to create their own myth. There are Christians who say that there are similar stories, such as the assassinations of Lincoln and Kennedy (both presidents of the USA), but we will see below that there are no coincidences, but rather, myths that are copied from each other. There will also be pictures to illustrate and facilitate our understanding.
We will start in Egypt, home and cradle to several mythologies, since there we find Osiris, a redeemer that died to save us; so let’s see what the specialists have to say about the myth of Osiris:
Mr. Bonwick, on talking about Osiris, says:” He is one of the Saviors of humanity that can be found in almost all nations (however, his name changes from country to country). In his efforts to do good he meets evil; in fighting against (evil) he is overcome and is killed” [Bonwick, Convicção egípcia, p. 155]
Alexander Murray says:
“The Egyptian Savior Osiris was recognizably considered as the great example of abnegation, giving his life for that of others” [Murray, Manual de Mitologia, p. 348]
The creators of the Christian mythology were clearly influenced by these myths, as we will see:
“Even as the Son of man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” [Bible – The Gospel According to Matthew 20:28]
Another famous myth was that of Attis, called the “The only begotten son (Knight, Ancient Art and Mythology, p. xxii.) and “the savior” and was adored by the Phrygians (one of the most ancient Asian races). The myth of Attis was always represented by a man tied to a tree (Dupuls, Origin of Religious Belief, p. 255) and also depicted as a man nailed to a tree.
Now we will talk of Tammuz (or Adonis), the Syrian Adonai; this was another God that was born from a virgin, suffered for the human race and was called “Savior”; the elders that honored Tammuz (Adonis) as their God and Savior celebrated his death with a banquet (it was their God’s Supper, an event that exists in several religions). An image, planned as a representation of the God was placed on a bed or coffin, and moaned sad hymns in the same way as the Catholic Christians would do later on.
One of the most famous redeemers of antiquity was called Prometheus. He was an immortal God, a friend of the human race, who did not fear sacrificing himself to save us. The tragedy of Prometheus’ crucifixion was written by Aeschylus, and took place in Athens, 500 years before Christ, and is considered by many the oldest existing dramatic poem. Prometheus was nailed by his hands and feet, states a specialist: “While he was hanging, his arms were opened to form a cross, and the services he rendered on behalf of the human race led to that horrible crucifixion.” [Aeschylus, Prometheus Chained, Harper and Bros., N.Y.]
In the myth, Prometheus always appears as a friend of human beings, suffering great tortures by their side. What is most curious about Prometheus is that his friend Oceanus, the fisherman (the origin of the term “ocean”) tried to influence Prometheus not to sacrifice himself for the human race, but Prometheus did not give up. The creators of Christian mythology did not have too much to do: the same story is repeated in the Gospel, down to every detail, including that of Peter, the apostle that was closest to Jesus, being a fisherman (like Oceanus in the Prometheus myth). There is a passage in the Gospel that says that Peter and Jesus replicate the same Oceanus and Prometheus’ story. It says:
“From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priest and scribes, and be killed, and on the third be raised. And Peter took him and began to rebuke him, saying, “God forbid, Lord! This shall never happen to you.” But he turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men.”
[The Bible - The Gospel According to Matthew 16:21-23]
A mere myth copied from many others.
In addition to these there are a myriad of other redeemers and saviors that died (some even crucified) to save humanity, many of them prophesized in previous books. Other examples of redeemers are:
Serapis, Apollo, Mithras, Orpehus, Ixion, Hercules, Krisnah, Esculapis (in whose memory a temple was built in Athens called: “The Savior’s Temple”), Bacchus, the God of wine (who transformed water into wine in his mythology). In Bacchus’s monument it is written:
“It is I (says the god Bacchus to the humans) who guides you; it is I who protects you; it is I who saves you; It is I who am the Alfa and the Omega”. [Quotation from Bacchus’s monument]
I now leave you with a series of images that will allow for better understanding of the myth of Christian redemption:
Ixion, a redeemer who died to save us, was also a solar god, the invincible sun that brings light after darkness.
Orpheus nailed to an anchor, just like Christ would be nailed to a cross later on (notice the crooked legs commonly found in many crucifixes).
And there is also our savior Prometheus, undergoing torture to save the men of this world.
And finally, the mythology of the crucified Christ. Notice the similarity with the crucifixion of Orpheus, for instance. Before Christ’s mythology, several other cultures had cults for redeemers and saviors who died to save us (many of them crucified), from which the creators of the Christian mythology fashioned their novel.
I sincerely ask you, if you have read this text thus far, to please to forward it; don’t let this mythology proliferate. The time has come for us human beings to do our part in destroying everything that is false and mythological.
“Proclaim, He is the One and only GOD. The Absolute GOD. Never did He beget. Nor was He begotten. Nothing equals Him!”
[The Koran 112:1-4]
1-Prog. Relig. Ideas
3-Manual of Mythology
5-Prometheus Chained, Harper and Bros., N.Y
7-Origin of Religious Belief
10-Son of Man
I would like to receive, if possible, a reply on this issue.
Dear André ("Inquisitio"),
First of all, I
have to thank you for your words praising our work on the
As for the
article you send me for analysis, signed by a certain Karls
Eduardo, it is clearly the attack of a Muslim to the
Christian faith. This is made very clear from the quotation
from the Koran that he uses to end the article:
He is the One and only GOD. The
Absolute GOD. Never did He beget. Nor was He begotten.
Nothing equals Him!”
[The Koran 112:1-4]
is preceded by a threatening purpose, since the author wrote
a clear declaration of war on Christianity:
sincerely ask you, if you have read this text thus far, to
please to forward it; don’t let this mythology
proliferate. The time has come for us human beings to do our
part in destroying everything that is false and
mythological.” (Our bold, italics, and
The author’s Muslim character is also manifest in the phrase he uses to open his article, a typically Muslim phrase:
name of God, the Graceful, the Merciful" ("Bismi
Allah ar-rahmani ar- rahimi") are the first words of
the so-called Alfatiha, the opening Surah [chapter]
of the Muslim Koran.
So, in the name
of Allah, the graceful and the merciful, this Muslim
declares war on Christianity over the Internet, by asking
people to pledge to “do your part in destroying
everything that is false and mythological”, that is,
to destroy what he calls “the mythology of Christian
We are before a
frontal attack and a threat.
Of course we
have to defend our Faith.
It is our duty.
Inasmuch, as we are acting in self-defense against an attack
on the Christian Faith, carried out without any respect and
no serious foundation.
And let no one
say that we started the attack, because we are only
And let no one
say that we are disrespecting other people’s beliefs,
because it is Christ and the Christianity that are being
attacked and disrespected. We are only going to defend the
Word of the incarnated God and the Christian Faith that are
being attacked as myths.
Of course we
are not going to imitate this aggressor of Faith in Christ,
our Redeemer, by using the same illogical and disjointed
weapons used by the doctrinarian aggressor. We are not going
to make use of personal offenses or insulting affronts.
We will limit
ourselves to make a historical analysis of the documents
quoted by the Muslims themselves, and later, in a scientific
and logical way, of the Koran; but we will not use imaginary
and slanderous analogies such as our aggressor has done
regarding Christ, as he compares Him to Adonis, Osiris, and
other pagan mythological figures.
We will not
waste time, for now, with these wild comparisons lacking
historical and scientific foundation that the maleficent
author makes between Osiris, Adonis, Tien, etc. and Christ.
They are absurd and ridiculous, and only expose a prejudiced
and fanatic spirit. All of these comparisons cannot belie
the historical fact that Christ died on the cross, and that
He died for our sins. All of these unwarranted comparisons
aim only at destroying Christianity, here, in “Terra de
Santa Cruz (Land of the Holy Cross), the aggressor’s
First of all,
let’s take a look at Surah 112 quoted by him – Surah
Al'Ikhlass or of the Divine Unity. It is clearly
against the Trinity, since it denies the eternal generation
of the Word in God. So, this Surah blatantly proves the
anti-Christian and anti-Trinity character of the Koran.
raises a question: how did Mohammed, who was illiterate,
know the theological problem of the eternal generation of
Mohammed was a
simple illiterate Koraishite, lacking any theological
knowledge, but who in this Surah repeats the beliefs of the
Pharisees that denied the Divinity of the Word, and those of
the Arians of the Byzantine Empire that refused to recognize
that the Word was God. For the Arians, like for the
Pharisees, Christ was just a simple creature, and not God.
At most, He would be a prophet that sinned for having
declared himself equal to God, the Father.
have learned with some Jew, Pharisee, or some Byzantine of
Arian faith something about this complex theological problem
called Procession of the Word?
learned this anti-Trinitarianism from some Pharisee Jew, or
Byzantine Arian, then it is the Koran that is not of divine
inspiration, but rather the work of a man, and an
It is written
in the Koran itself that the Arabs of Mohammed’s time said
that he, Mohammed, had been taught by a foreigner:
misbelievers say: "Naught is this (the Koran)
but a lie which he (Mohammed) has forged, and
others have helped him at it! In truth it is they who have
put forward an iniquity and a falsehood.” (Koran,
Surah Alfurcan or “The Criterion”. Surah 25: 4, apud
Alcorão Sagrado Portuguese version by Samir
Hayer, Ed. Tangará - Expansão Editorial, São Paulo, 1979).
accusation made by Mohammed’s Arab contemporaries that he
was indeed taught by other men and not inspired by God, is
recorded in the Koran, yet in another Surah:
indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him
(the Koran to Mohammed)." The tongue of him they
wickedly point to is notably foreign (Persian), while this
(from this Koran) is Arabic, pure and clear."
(Koran, Surah 16:103. Surah Annahl or Surah of the
Bees. Cfr. Aminuddin Mohamad , op. cit., p. 87).
So, you will
notice, dear inquirer, that the counter-argument used to
defend Mohammed that he was taught by another man is very
weak, even ridiculous: the foreigner accused of teaching
Mohammed would be a Persian speaker and Mohammed’s book is
written in Arabic. However, if Mohammed did not know the
Persian language, such a Persian-speaking man could very
well have known Arabic and thus have taught Mohammed.
So, the answer
found in the Koran only aggravates the accusations made by
Mohammed’s contemporaries: he has indeed taught by
But who were
Surah 44 it is written: Then they turned away from him and
said: “A tutored fanatic!” (Koran, Surah 44:14, Smoke
Note that it
isn’t us stating this.
It is the Koran
that contains these words and this accusation. It is the
Koran that doesn’t clearly refute the accusation. On the
Muslim book published here in Brazil to disseminate Islam,
the following can be read:
under the hypothesis that someone taught him – [to Mohammed]
– so this person, if he is an Arab, why didn’t he keep such
a great work for himself, preferring to hand it to Mohammed?
And if he is not an Arab, the falseness of the accusation
becomes clear, because if the Prophet did not know
another language besides Arabic, how could he communicate
with someone who was not Arab?”(Aminuddin
Mohamad, Mohammad. O Mensageiro de Deus,
Centro de Divulgação do Islam para a América Latina, São
Bernardo do Campo SP. 1989 D.C. 1409 H., p. 436. Our bold
The argument is
ridiculously childish: Mohammed was not taught by a
foreigner, a non-Arab, because Mohammed did not know any
language other than Arabic, and so, Mohammed could not have
been able to communicate with this foreigner.
possible, though, is for this foreigner to have lived in
Mecca, known Arabic, which is very likely, and have taught
This is as
clear as drinking water.
But, instead of
building arguments ourselves, let’s do something else: we
will quote only from what Muslims said about Mohammed. At
first we will read only what they wrote themselves, allowing
ourselves a question or two and a brief comment on the more
For such, we
will use the already quoted book written by Aminuddin
Mohamad, called Mohammad: The Messenger of God,
published by Centro de Divulgação do Islam para a América
Latina, São Bernando do Campo, SP. 1989. D.C. 1409 H.
We believe that
this will be very interesting and convincing and that if
there is a myth, it is not the myth of Christ the Redeemer,
but rather that of Mohammed as a Prophet.
We did not
create this controversy or accusation. We are only replying
to them, and not even with the same illogical weapons, but
rather with a historical and logical analysis, with no
intention of offending anyone, whatsoever.
So, let’s move
on to the quotations from this book that disseminates Islam.
– The World in Mohammed’s Time
“Shortly before Mohammed’s prophecy, the countries were
completely disaggregated political, religious, and morally.
All aspects of life were corrupted and needed general
(…) the sixth and seventh centuries A.D. were periods of dictatorships, disturbances, and anarchy. (…)
regard, the world was also in poor shape. Society, as it
divided itself into different ethnic groups, races, casts,
and so on, lost its cohesive force.” (Aminuddin Mohamad,
Mohammad: The Messenger of God, Centro de
Divulgação do Islam para a América Latina, São Bernardo do
Campo SP. 1989 A.D. 1409 H., p. 9).
[It is not
necessary to show how much this text fails as it generalizes
and uses inaccurate terminology. It is enough to remember
that the sixth and seventh centuries were the times of men
like Emperor Justinian, author of the Juris Civilis Codex;
Popes like Saint Gregory Magnum; Queens like Saint Clothilde;
Bishops like Saint Remy, Saint Patrick, Saint Gregory of
Tours; monks like Saint Columba and several others, too many
women, in the sixth and seventh centuries, the book we are
quoting from says:
“Women had no
recognition in society; they were not treated as equals,
they were just an object of pleasure. Some killed their
daughters. In Arabia they were buried alive; in other
parts widows were burned alive, women could not read
religious books. (…) In Greece, women were locked at home;
in Christian churches they were taken as sisters, isolated
from the practical world” (Aminuddin, op. cit. pp. 10-11.
[At that same
time lived queens Saint Clothilde and Saint Radegunda, in
France, and Emperor Theodora from Constantinople, who played
an important political, social, and religious role. While in
Arabia, according to Omar, the third Caliph:
we did not have any consideration for our women; not until
God revealed respect for them and their rights did we start
showing consideration for them” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op.
cit., p. 3650].
And it is still
Aminuddin Mohamad’s the following amazing paragraph:
until 1870 that the situation began to get relatively
better. Until today women in the West continue to fight for
their rights. In Islam, this is not the case. Today, Islam
teaches that the origin of man and woman is from the same
essence, that they have the same soul, that they are
balanced in terms of equal skills regarding intellectual,
spiritual, and moral merits, and considers women’s rights as
sacred” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op cit., p. 11).
[It is not
possible to refrain from thinking that women’s situation in
Islam and in the West has always been – and still is – very
different. It is enough to think of the existence of
states in his book that Mohammed was one of Christ’s
according to the Koran”:
you remember when Jesus, the son of Mary said: O ye Sons of
Israel, in truth I am the Prophet of God (sent)
to you to confirm everything that is in the Torah and to
announce the good news about a messenger that will arrive
after me, whose name will be Ahmad (the praised
one)” (This is one of the Prophet’s name) (Koran,
Surah. 61:6. Apud Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. p. 44).
[It is needless
to say that Jesus never said this. From where did the
Koran’s author take this phrase that is totally inexistent
in the Gospels? And how curious it is that the Koran should
have Jesus defending the Torah. And after the invented
quotation, the absurd interpretation that the Holy Paraclito
Spirit – The Holy Ghost – announced by Christ, would be
Mohammed, who was not a spirit, but rather a man of flesh
and bones, and who was not in any way the “Counselor”]:
I tell you the truth that contains (Sic! It should
say “that is convenient, to your advantage")
for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you"
(St. John, 16:7, apud Aminuddin Mohamad, op cit. p.
that Mohammed’s mother, Amina, did not suffer any pain while
pregnant with him, and she would have said the following:
“Were it not
for the appearance of an Angel after I conceived, and when I
was about to sleep, telling me: don’t you see that you are
with child and that in your womb is the Prophet of all the
Nations? (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. p. 49).
[ And then
there comes this Karl Eduardo drawing parallels between
Christ and Osiris or Adonis, without realizing that there is
a parallel to be drawn between the Virgin Mary and Amina,
Mohammed’s mother!... And what document can Karl Eduardo
quote to prove that Mohammed’s mother said all this? None.
It is pure legend].
of the Cut in Mohammed’s Chest"
Mohamad tells that when Mohammed was little, around four
years old, one day two angels appeared, cut his chest open
and tore out his heart, the "center of evil".
himself would have told the story:
were two men, dressed in white, who laid me on the ground
and then cut me down to here (pointing at his
chest), and then took something out, that I don’t know
what it was". When Halima [Mohammed’s nurse]
checked Mohammed’s chest and saw that there was no sign of a
cut, she was frightened (...).
news spread, the neighbors advised Halima to consult a
soothsayer or an astrologer. They went to a Jewish man, who
increased the concern expressed by Mohammed’s nurse and her
husband, because when he saw Mohammed, he started to scream,
saying: “this is the child that will start a revolution in
Arabia and will end all the existing religions. So, ye men,
if you want to save your religion, destroy this child”
(Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., pp. 51-52).
was considered the Prophet, did not know what had happened
to his chest, where no signs could be found, but the Jew
knew who the child was...]
Mohamad, who never saw Mohammed explains what happened:
stories in the books telling about two angels that came
under human guise and one of them (Gabriel) opened
Mohammed’s heart and took from it the center of evil and
then closed it again. These passages should not be taken too
literally, because at that time Mohammed was about three
years old, too small to witness anything. Even though this
passage is confirmed by Mohammed himself, after the
proclamation of the prophecy, and even if we take the
passage literally, we will see that there is nothing to be
amazed about, because this kind of operation is very common
in medicine, where the doctor opens the body of the sick
person, takes out and puts in anything he or she wishes, and
then closes the body again without the patient feeling any
pain, restoring it to health, as if he or she had never been
sick” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op,. cit., p. 52).
Aminuddin tell us is that Mohammed underwent heart surgery,
performed by two angels, one of whom was the angel Gabriel,
who took out from Mohammed’s heart the Center of Evil,
which would therefore be something material”. Well, this
belief that evil is a material thing is clearly a Gnostic
one, since it turns evil into something substantial].
In page 54 of
his book, Aminuddin Mohamad informs us that in those days,
in Arabia, “the large number of Jews living in the area
already talked about and awaited the arrival of the last
Prophet” (...) All of them went to see Mohammed: some
respected him, others were amazed at seeing the signs of the
last Prophet in this child and said that the last Prophet
should be of their family (Israelite). “How was he born in
Quraysh?” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 54).
to the Centro de Divulgação do Islam’s book, the
Arabian Jews were awaiting the last Prophet and they
recognized him in Mohammed… Very interesting, very
interesting indeed, because the Jews for centuries have
been, and are still, awaiting the arrival of the Messiah,
who will be the last Prophet. Could it be, then, that in
seventh century Arabia there was a sect of Messianic Jews,
like so many others that have existed in History, that are
still awaiting the next arrival of the Messiah?
This is a
simple hypothesis derived from the historical study we are
carrying out, construed from Aminuddin Mohamad’s texts,
which we are quoting here. Specialists in Islam have come up
with similar theses and not mere hypotheses as we are doing
here. Among others I am referring to the books: The Jews
of Islam, by Bernard Lewis, Princeton University Press;
Hagarism: the Making of Islamic World, a book
by Patricia Crone and Michael Cook, Cambridge University
Press, 1977, or Hanna Zakharias’s book called De Moïse à
Mohamad: Islam Entreprise Juive, Cahors, an exhaustive
and profound analysis of the Koran; and to Le Coran,
Traduction et Commentaire Siystématique, by Frère Bruno
Bonnet-Eymard, Ed La Contre Réforme Catholique, Saint
parreslès Vaudes, 1988].
Aminuddin Mohamad says that in one of Mohammed’s trip to
Syria, he would have been recognized as a Prophet by a
Christian monk called Buhira (cfr. op. cit., p. 56).
“When he was
twenty, he [Mohammed] joined the trade caravans of Mecca’s
capitalists” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 60).
Prophet’s Marriage to Khadija"
On this story
we will limit ourselves to quoting Aminuddin Mohamad:
“Her name was
Khadija Bin Khwilid Bin Asad Bin Abdul Urga Bin Ausai: her
title was Tahera (The Pure). Khadija, an honorable and
respected woman, fifth degree in her genealogy (in Qusai),
was related to Prophet Mohammed’s family. She lived in
Mecca, was around forty (40) years old. The mother of
several children, she had been a widow twice, and was very
rich. When her second husband died, several men from Mecca
wanted to marry her, but she refused them all. When the
trade caravan from Mecca set out on a trip, only Khadija’s
goods compared to those of all the other merchants” (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 61).
was a relatively older woman, who had already had two
husbands, several children, and was very rich.]
Mohammed was 25 years old, had a beautiful face, was of
medium height, not too tall, not too short, had a big head,
thick and very dark hair, a large forehead, thick eyebrows,
big black eyes, slightly rosy cheeks and long eyelashes,
which enhanced his attractiveness; he had a beautiful nose,
well-placed teeth, thick beard, long and beautiful neck,
wide shoulders and chest, clear complexion, plump hands and
feet and he walked in a resolute and steady way; he always
looked as if he were in deep thought and contemplation; and
his look hid the authority of the Commander of Men. So, it
is in no way amazing that Khadija gave him her love and
submitted to his desires as she gave him all her merchandise
to manage after their wedding, as she had already done
before the wedding, in order to give him means to go on with
his contemplative life” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p.
[Would it be
“disrespectful” for a historian to be amazed at the fact
that an Arab young man, 25 years old, single, and that a
40-year old woman, twice a widow, with several children,
very rich, would marry a much younger and poorer man than
herself? And would it be “disrespectful” to imagine that
managing the largest fortune in Mecca, Mohammed would have
had a lot more time for… contemplation?
Or would it be
more disrespectful to state that Jesus, the Redeemer, is a
myth that should be destroyed?]
Mohamad’s story goes on:
created love for Mohamad in Khadija’s heart. She was 40, but
now she wanted to marry a young man of 25, whose attitude
and words captivated her heart. She talked about her love
for him with her friend Nafissa, but the question was if he
(Mohammed) would accept her or not. Women, for the record,
are great diplomats. So, Khadija sent Nafissa to talk with
Mohammed to find out. When Nafissa met Mohammed, the
conversation was the following:
prevents you from getting married?
have I got to be able to get married? (I have no material
possessions in order to get married).
Nafissa: But if
this did not matter and you were asked to marry beauty,
wealth, nobility, and satisfaction, what would you say?
is this possible?
it to me.
Mohammed: So, I
So this is how
the wedding between Mohammed and Khadija was settled.
Mohammed was also in love with her, but since she had
refused marriage proposals from wealthier people, he did not
want to be the first to send the proposal. Now that she
proposed first, he accepted with great pleasure”.
Mohamad, op. cit. pp. 62-63. We are not saying
anything. All we are doing is to copy what is written in the
book advertising Islam).
So, let’s go
with our copying:
Khadija started to prepare the wedding with no delay, and
set the wedding date for that in which Mohammed’s uncle and
aunt could come to see her relatives to ask for her hand and
other formalities. (…) In Arabia, women had the freedom to
plan their own weddings, and this is why even in her uncle’s
presence, Khadija did almost everything herself; the date
was set and on that date all the family leaders on
Mohammed’s side came, including Hamza and Abu Talib. (…) And
so, after the wedding, Mohammed moved to Khadija’s house”. (Aminuddin
Mohamad. op. cit., p. 63).
wasn’t Khadija who moved to Mohammed’s house, but instead,
he moved to hers].
“Thus a new
chapter began in Mohammed’s and Khadija’s life. Mohammed had
all of his children with Khadija, except for Ibrahim. She
lived 25 years with him, had seven children by him, 3 boys:
Kassim, Tahir, Tahib that died very young, before Mohammed
received the divine message, and four girls: Zainab, Rucaya,
Umm Kulçum, and Fatma, who survived and got married. Three
of them died during Mohammed’s lifetime, and only one, Fatma,
lived to bear two children, Hassan and Hussein. While
Khadija was alive, Mohammed did not marry anybody else” (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit.,p. 63).
have been extremely fertile to have had seven children after
she was forty, especially considering that in Arabia, women
age much sooner].
“(…) and the
two [Mohammed and Khadija] lived happily without having had
one single dispute or problem during the twenty-five years
in which they were together, despite their age difference” (Aminuddin
Mohamad , op. cit., p. 64).
“In the month
that Khadija died, the Prophet married Sawdah Bin Zam’a, the
widow of a Muslim of those who had immigrated to Abyssinia
and then returned. (…) One month later (…) he promised to
marry Aicha [Abu Bakr’s daughter]. Aicha was the only virgin
with whom the Prophet ever got married (Cfr. Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 121).
married several other women, including a relative, called
Zaynab, the wife of his adopted son, Zayd ibn Harith Ibn
Char’habil, a slave that Khadija had given Mohammed and whom
he adopted as a son. (Cfr Koran, Surah 33: 37, The
Allied Forces, Surah Alahzab).
nine wives. The Koran warned him about that by saying:
women will be lawful for you later on nor may you exchange
them for other wives, even though their beauty may entice
you, except for someone your right hand controls. God is an
Observer over everything.” (Koran, Surah 33:52,
Alahzab, The Allied Forces).
Khadija lived, and against Arab customs, he only had one
wife and never had an argument with her, according to
Aminuddin Mohamad’s book.
After he got
married, Mohammed “isolated himself in order to meditate in
a cavern in Mount Hira, called Jabalan-Nur, located in the
north of Mecca. It was a quiet place, from where the Kaaba
could be seen” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 66)
de Divulgação do Islam para América Latina’s book from
which we are taking these quotations, tells us that Mohammed
had his first vision when he was 40 years old:
reached forty, God chose him to guide the creatures of the
whole world, to take them from darkness and lead them to
light. It was in February or July of the year 610, after the
birth of Christ, according to the Egyptian astrologer Mahmud
Bacha; the 17th of the Ramadan, 13 years before
the Hijra (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 67).
“In one of
those days, while in deep contemplation inside the cave, an
angel (Gabriel) appeared to the Prophet and said”:
replied: “I don’t know how to recite”. So, he felt as if the
angel choked him (strangling him), and then let go. So, he
heard the order once again: “Recite!!” and Mohammed said: “I
don’t know how to recite”. So, Mohammed was once again
choked and let go, and the angel repeated the order for the
third time and Mohammed asked what he should recite. The
(or read!) In the name of thy Lord and Cherished, who
created – created man out of a (mere) clot of congealed
blood: Proclaim! And thy Lord is Most Bountiful – he, who
taught (the use of) the pen,- taught man that which he knew
not.” (Koran 96:1-5. Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit.,
We should note
that, from the start, the angel didn’t tell what
Mohammed should recite.
It was only
after the third attempt that the angel told Mohammed what he
natural question to the Angel should have been:
One can only
recite a text that has been provided either orally or in
Until then, the
angel had said nothing to Mohammed, but later, he says that
the text to be recited was written “by pen”…
If there was no
written text in the cave, what could have Mohammed recited?
Or was there a
text written by the pen?
Mohammed was illiterate, having a written text in hand would
have been of no use. He could only have recited a text if
there had been someone in the cave reading him a text,
asking him to repeat it.
Could it have
been the choking angel himself teaching Mohammed?
choking angel’s reply hints at the fact that there was a
written text to be recited, saying that God, the Lord,
taught by the pen, and not through the word, teaching
man that which he knew not.
What text was
this, written by the pen, by the Lord himself?
And who was
this man that received this text written by the pen?
man was not Mohammed, who was illiterate.
It was no use,
we repeat, giving a written text to an illiterate.
have a book in the cave in Mount Hiraa?
And what good
would a book, written by the pen, have been to him, if he
didn’t know how to read?
There must have
been someone there to read Mohammed the book.
And was this
someone – the choking angel? – reading Mohammed the book,
forcing him to repeat it and recite it to memorize it?
The method used
by the “Angel” was two-pronged:
2) Forcing him
to memorize the text written by the pen.
We must agree
that the first part of the method used – the choking – was
As for the
second part of the method – reciting – so that an illiterate
could memorize a text was a method used by Jewish rabbis in
their schools, for centuries:
the Oral Law was not codified and written down, the method
used by the scribes to hand it down was memorization and
repetition. Repeating and teaching are equivalent words in
rabbinic language. The disciples of the masters (Rabbis) had
to memorize the Oral Torah, as well as the legal solutions
adopted by the Elders, without any changes added to what had
been received. The disciple was therefore forced to express
himself by using the same words used by his master. From
this mnemonic and repetitive teaching came the word Mishnah
that means repetition. The commandments of this Oral
Tradition of the elderly were called Mishnaioth” (Orlando
Fedeli, Escribas, Doutores da Lei e Fariseus, in
Mount Hiraa was forced to recite a pre-existing written text
and this text could not have been the Koran, because it had
not been written yet.
What was this
written text, what book, was Mohammed forced to memorize by
repeating its content?
learned of what had happened to Mohammed, she said to him
(according the Centro de Divulgação do Islam’s book):
husband, don’t you worry, be content and firm. For him
who has Khadija’s life in his hand, I have strong hopes
that you will be the Prophet of this people; I swear to
God that He will never leave you, (…)”( Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 68. Our bold).
From this text
it can be clearly seen that Khadija was not a polytheist and
idolater, but rather, a monotheist, even before Mohammed
began to be called a Prophet, for she swore to God, in the
singular. She said she had “strong hopes” that Mohammed
would be the Prophet. So, he was not the Prophet yet.
Therefore, Khadija was already a monotheist even before
Mohammed became the Prophet.
So what was
have been Islamic, since Mohammed had not started preaching
Would she be a
Christian monotheist, or a Jewish monotheist?
questions arise spontaneously.
telling this, the Centro de Divulgação do Islam’s
book remarks that:
looking for the Universe’s hidden reality, and the
First revelation is the beginning of his learning book,
and reality is his Master, like it had been told to him,
the word “Rabb”, in Arabic, means Nourisher, Creator,
Provider, Administrator, Owner, and Master of the Universe;
the first lesson starts with the name of the Master, because
man is the main objective of man’s study” (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 69. Our bold).
was looking for the “Universe’s hidden reality”…
What a most
strangely exoteric formula! And more exoteric it becomes
with the final explanation that “man is the main
objective of man’s study”, when it would be expected for
man’s main study objective to be God.
de Divulgação do Islam para América Latina’s book
reassured Mohammed with her rich words, she also wanted to
reiterate that through those that had some knowledge
about the Prophets” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 70.
Had Some Knowledge About the Prophets"?
Who were those
“specialists” on Prophets, in the seventh century Mecca?
And it is
important to note that “those who had some knowledge
about the Prophets” is in the plural.
were several specialists on prophets in Mecca in the seventh
Who could these
Could they be priests, or rabbis?
provides information about these experts “that had some
knowledge about the Prophets”, when it tells Mohammed,
in Surah 10 – Surah lunes:
if you are in doubt about what we have revealed, consult
those who have read the book before you" (Koran,
10:94. Edição Tangará do Alcorão Sagrado,
Arabic version by Samir el Hayek, São Paulo, 1979, p.152).
And in the
French version of the Koran, by Juan Vernet, also the author
of the introduction and the notes to the Koran, the
following note, No. 94, can be read about this passage:
“Ask those who
have read the book before you”: According to the tradition
it is astonishing to have this statement allowing Mohammed
to consult the rabbi in case of doubt” (Cfr El Corán,
Editorial Planeta, Barcelona 1983, p. 216, note 94).
The same book,
Divulgação do Islam by Aminuddin Mohamad, explains
she [Khadija] has just said was her opinion, once she didn’t
know the reality of what Mohammed saw and heard (…) She
thought of consulting “Waraca Bin Nawfal”, someone
related to Khadija, a man that had converted to the
Christian faith and translated parts of the Hebrew
Gospel into Arabic; he was very old and blind, but he
new something about the prophecy, because he read the
Torah and the Gospel regularly” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op
cit., p. 70. The bold is ours).
So, Khadija had
at home a “relative”, blind, who “read the
Torah and the Gospel regularly”!
man that read is really an extraordinary fact,
particularly in those days when the Braille language was not
How did the
blind man read???
And he read the
converted to the Christian faith!!!
What had been
his previous religion?
A convert to
the Christian faith, who in spite of being blind also read
the Torah, clearly raises a question: would he be originally
a Jew by religion?
Could he be one
of those who “read the Book before Mohammed”?
Could he be one
of those who Mohammed should consult when in doubt about
The Book, as mentioned in Surah lunes?
In what sense
was he “related” to Khadija?
Was he her
Was he related
in the sense that he lived in her home?
If so, why did
he live there?
Did he live in
another house and was related to Khadija because he was an
acquaintance, a friend?
consulted him previously about religion?
monotheism a result of her possible conversations with
Warraca bem Nawfal?
Had he tried to
convert Khadija to monotheism?
Had he succeed?
Khadija’s surprising monotheism, already mentioned, a result
of Warraca’s preaching?
But to what
kind of monotheism did he convert her to, or tried to:
Christian monotheism, that believes in a single God divided
into Three People at the same time equal and distinct, in
one single substance, or in the non-ternary God of the Jews?
But if he was
Jewish, and if he was Khadija’s relative, it is worth asking
the question if Khadija herself – who professed to be a
monotheist much too quickly and much too soon – was not of
Jewish origin, and a foreigner in Mecca. Mohammed’s monogamy
while she was alive, Khadija’s wealth, her being the owner
of caravans whose trade she managed herself, and very well,
something uncommon among Arab women, lead to another
question: could Khadija have been Jewish?
And Warraca ben
Nawfal, the blind, who read the Torah and the Gospel
regularly, and who also translated only parts of it into
Arabic, was he Jewish or Christian?
If he was
Christian why did he translate only “parts of the Gospel”
Why didn’t he translate all of the Gospels in their entirety?
This is not
And why, and
what for, did he translate only some parts of the Gospel
Warraca’s purpose: to convert idolater Arabs to the
Or to convert them to the Torah, by having them recite the Book of the Jews, the Old Testament, like the rabbi used to have their pupils recite in the rabbinic schools?
who was so interested in religion and in meditating in Mount
Hiraa, how come he never spoke with Warraca, a specialist in
the prophets, in the Torah and the Gospels, and himself so
much interested in converting idolater Arabs to monotheism
to the point that, even being a blind man, translating “parts
of the Gospel” into Arabic?
Mohammed ever speak with Warraca?
Or had he
already spoken with him?
Could it be
that Warraca never tried to talk with Mohammed, he, who was
so interested in converting idolater Arabs to monotheism?
Or could it be
that Mohammed had been contacted by Warraca, from the very
Well, we ask to
be excused for asking these indiscreet – and so obvious – as
well as pertinent questions.
Mohammed was taken by Khadija to talk to Warraca Ben Nawafal
to explain him his first revelation. And what was Warraca’s
opinion of Mohammed’s choking vision?
Warraca soon explained the whole passage:
This is the same Spirit (Angel) that God sent Moses (with the Revelation) and you are the Prophet of this nation”. And went on saying that: “You will be refuted, you will be offended, you will be abused, persecuted, and expelled, when you ask them to abandon their traditional false beliefs. If I lived until this day, in which your people will expel you, I would certainly help you with God’s cause, but I am old”. (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 71. Our bold).
In the Centro de Divulgação do Islam na América Latina’s book, Warraca was admittedly not an Arab, since he says to Mohammed: “your people”, thus confessing that he, Warraca, did not belong to the Arab people.
Warraca was a
What was his
nationality; what people did Warraca belong to?
This name is
not Byzantine Greek, nor Latin, nor Persian.
If it is not Arab, the name Ben Nawfal can only be Jewish. Warraca ben Nawfal was of Jewish origin and this is the reason why, even though a convert, maybe to Christianity, he read the Torah.
And it should
be noted that Warraca – quite possibly a rabbi – said that
the spirit that spoke to Mohammed was the same that
had spoken with Moses, and not the one who had spoken of
inspiration had a Jewish source.
days, the revelations would have come back to Mohammed, and
were never interrupted again until the end of his life, or
at least, this is what the Muslim book we are quoting says.
This book also
informs that there was a risk in teaching monotheism in a
land of idolaters, so Mohammed started to teach monotheism
“So, the first
phase of his mission was to present this faith secretly
(dangerously at the time) to the people who were closest to
him and who he could trust, those who had already lived with
the Prophet. So he started at home. Khadija, his wife, was
the first one to convert, then Ali Bin Abu Talib, his
cousin, who lived with the Prophet since his childhood,
because Abu Talib’s father had many children and was in a
very critical financial situation.” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op.
cit., pp. 73-74).
It mustn’t have
been too difficult to “convert” Khadija to monotheism,
because as we have seen, she already swore by a single God,
even before Mohammed explained his first
vision to Warraca ben Nawfal.
And on page 74
of the book we are studying it says:
And by then –
fearing being mistreated by the Arabs – the
invitation for Islamism was still made secretly (…)” (Aminuddin,
Mohamad, op. cit., pp. 74-75. Our bold).
Aminuddin gives us an interesting clue: he should have
written that Mohammed feared being mistreated by the
polytheist idolaters, and not by the Arabs.
Several Arabs had followed Mohammed. It was not the Arabs,
because they were Arabs that could mistreat him, but
rather, the polytheists. Aminuddin’s small mistake could
suggest that the fight would be between Arabs and non-Arabs,
and not between monotheist and polytheists. Inasmuch as he
informs, later on, that several Arab tribes had adopted
Jewish monotheism even before that time (Cfr. Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., pp. 134-135-136).
Who were those
Would they be
the Christians or the Jews?
In Arabia, in
Mohammed’s time, there were many Jewish and Christian
And these two
groups of foreigners were both monotheist.
On page 83 of
the Divulgação do Islam para a América Latina‘s book,
there is another precious information:
“And there are many common things between Islam and the Christian faith, particularly at that time; the Muslim’s Quibla was Jerusalem, just as it was the Christian’s Quibla” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. p. 83).
The Quibla is a
small niche in Moslem mosques that provide the direction in
which the faithful must turn to pray. In the beginning,
Mohammed had his followers pray in the direction of
Jerusalem, which is symptomatic. Later on, Mohammed turned
the Quibla in the direction of Mecca, and today’s Moslems
pray only facing Mecca.
Saying that the
Christians had a Quibla, any time, is absurd. Christians
always had their altars turned to the east, facing the
rising sun, and never turned in the direction of Jerusalem.
Even if this were true, that Christians prayed turned to
Jerusalem, it would have made sense, because Christ died and
resuscitated in Jerusalem. But for Moslems, who reject
Christ as God, and detest the Jews, it seems rather curious
that they, like the Jews, initially prayed turned to
Jerusalem, which Mohammed, as a simple illiterate Koraishite
from Mecca, simply didn’t know.
So, why this
respect for Jerusalem in primitive Islam?
Could it be
based on advice from those “who had some knowledge about
the Prophets”, the masters of the Torah, who had read
The Book before Mohammed? That is, under the guidance of
the “specialists on Prophets” Mohammed determined that his
followers, like the Jews, prayed turned to Jerusalem?
Mohamad tells us that when the Moslems were still in very
small number in Mecca, they could not recite the Koran in
“As we saw in
Mecca, the Moslems were persecuted, massacred, tortured,
only because they believed in a single God and wanted
freedom to worship a single deity”.
increasingly difficult for the faithful to worship a single
God and even to recite the Koran in public. It had
to be done secretly, and even so, when found out they
were the object of all kinds of oppression” (Aminuddin
Mohammad, op. cit., p. 96).
But what an
So, the first Muslims already had a book that they recited!!!
What book did
the first Muslims recite, if the Koran was not written until
many years later?
Would it be the
Book that others had read before Mohammed?
Aminuddin Mohammad himself explains that the Koran was compiled much later than Mohammed’s time.
Prophet’s lifetime several materials were used on which to
write the Koran: leather, wood, stone, parchment, etc. (…)”.
“Soon after, in Abu Bakr’s caliphate, it was written and compiled in one single volume, which was kept by Abu Bakr until his death, when it was given to Caliph Omar and later to Hafsa, Omar’s daughter and the Prophet’s wife. It was through this original copy that the third Osman caliph prepared other copies and sent them to the main Islamic cities” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., pp. 437-438).
So, there was
no Koran for the early Muslims to recite.
But it is
written by Aminuddin Mohamad that the first Muslims recited
the Book and that they were persecuted for it.
If this book
was not yet the current Koran, what was it?
Would it be the
same book that the choking angel asked Mohammed to recite?
Would it be Warraca’s Torah?
Would it be the book of those that knew the book before Mohammed, that is, the rabbis’ Torah?
Or – just for
the sake of asking – would it be the Gospels?
questions is relatively easy.
It is answering
them that is hard.
The persecution to the Muslims led Mohammed to advise some of them to flee to Abyssinia.
Even there they were persecuted by the idolatrous Koraishite that sent a commission to Negus to defame the emigrated Muslims.
Jaafar ibn Abu
Taleb – Ali ibn Abu Taleb’s brother – defended the Muslims
by giving a speech before the king of Abyssinia that let him
to know about the standard of living and the culture of the
Arab tribes, before Mohammed:
“Oh, King, we
were an ignorant people, we worshiped idols, we ate dead
animals (not beheaded), we committed indecencies, we
cut uterine relationships, we mistreated our own neighbors,
and those who were strong among us, devoured the weaker. We
were in this deplorable and inhuman condition when God sent
us a Messenger, from among us, whom we know. He is noble by
ancestry, true, honest, and chaste” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op.
cit., p. 98. Our bold).
In addition to
the surprising adjective “chaste” applied to Mohammed, who
had nine wives, not to mention the concubines, it must be
noted that it is said that the Muslims started to eat dead
animals, beheaded, that is, letting all the blood come out,
something that they did not do before.
Well, this custom and legal way of eating bloodless animals, having all the blood drained out, was the law of the Torah. This point to – like the Quibla turned to Jerusalem – a clear Jewish influence in primitive Islam.
was delivered before the king of Abyssinia, who was a
Christian, and before several bishops.
As a result…
“In a very
short time, the assembly showed its conflict with
Christianity” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 99).
So, from the
very start, Islam was opposed to Christianity.
The quotation above makes it clear that, from the very start, Islam was anti-Christian for not accepting the Trinity and for denying that Christ is the Son of God, the Second person of the Holy Trinity.
So, this is one
more sign that Warraca was in fact not a Christian, and that
Khadija’s monotheism, like that of Mohammed’s, must have had
The bishops of
Abyssinia did not know Vatican II, nor were they ecumenical,
and so they opposed the Muslims...
Mohammed’s Satanic Verses in the Koran
It is not know
for sure why the Muslims that went to Abyssinia returned to
Mohamad states in the book we are studying that:
”It came to the
knowledge of the emigrates the news that their people in
Mecca had converted to Islam, when the prophet recited the
Surah Na-Najm and praised the Koraish gods, as he recited
the following verse:
then ever seen the portents of Al-Lat and Al-Uzza? - And of
that third one Manat and of the others? (Koran,
Surah 53, 19-20) (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., pp. 106-107).
were three goddesses of the idolaters of Mecca].
Mohamad goes on:
“They say that
the Prophet added: these idols are honored and respected,
and their intersection is accepted and expected.
allusion they are idols.
that Satan is the one who recited with the Prophet in the
Prophet’s voice. After this, the Prophet bowed and all the
infidels also bowed because they were content at hearing
praises to their gods from the Prophet’s mouth.
But if we
ponder more deeply into this narrative and in the text
itself, and investigate carefully, we will come to the
conclusion that all of this is simply false and has been
made up, and is logically impossible.
"1st – The
chain of narrative of this passage is unacceptable, the
narrators are unknown and false, and this is why none of the
compilers of the Hadith (Prophet’s traditions) that are
considered authentic, include it in their compilations (in
– Their text is also unacceptable, because neither the
believers nor the unbelievers are naïve to the point of
hearing praises and honors to their gods while at the same
time criticism and condemnations are being said to the same
gods during the same recitation and in the same Chapter.
after that God says:
are nothing but a few names which you and your forefathers
have chosen for them for which Allah has revealed no
warrant. They follow merely a guess, and that which their
hearts desire, though guidance has come to them from their
Lord!” (Surah 53:23, Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. p.106-107).
So, the verses
don’t match. If this had happened they would have taken it
as evidence against the prophet, because it is a
contradiction” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p.106-107).
issue is in the Koran.
In Surah 53 it
then ever seen the portents of Al-Lat and Al-Uzza?”
“And of that
third one Manat and of the others?”
yours the sons and His the daughters?”
is a most one-sided apportionment!”
nothing but a few names which you and your forefathers have
chosen for them for which Allah has revealed no warrant.
They follow merely a guess, and that which their hearts
desire, though guidance has come to them from their Lord!”
(Koran, Surah 53, Surah Annajm, 19-23).
These were the
verses of the Koran, called satanic verses, because at that
time Mohammed would have been inspired by Satan; they caused
the famous incident of the poet Salman Rushdi’s being
sentenced to death, decreed by Ayatollah Khomeini...
We are not
going to go into this controversy.
Mohamad tells us that once Mohammed and his followers
underwent a long siege in Mecca, and that:
It was in these
days that the Prophet had the honor to ascend to the
Heavens, and that it was in that ascension that the five
daily prayers became compulsory” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op.
cit., p. 112).
is called "Al-Ishra Wal-Miraj" by the Arabs and supposedly
happened in the year 621, according to Surah 17:1:
Glorified be He Who carried His servant by night from the
Inviolable Place of Worship (in Mecca) to the Far distant
place of worship Alalcsa (in Jerusalem) the neighborhood
whereof We have blessed, that We might show him of Our
tokens! Lo! He, only He, is the Hearer, the Seer” (Koran,
Surah Alishrá, On the Night Trip, Surah 17:1).
First of all,
it is noteworthy that in this verse nothing is said about
the ascension into Heaven, but rather about a ”trip” to
that time there was still no mosque in Al Acsa, which was
built later by Omar.
Or are we
Thirdly, we will not resist quoting the following verse from Surah Al Ishrá:
“2. We gave unto Moses the Scripture, and We appointed it a guidance for the children of Israel, saying: Choose no guardian beside Me” (Koran, 17:2).
Book was given to Moses.
according to the Koran itself, was given to Moses and not to
This truth is
repeated several times in the Arab Koran.
- Jewish "Genies" Approve of the Koran
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
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.
What can be
understood by “Genies” in this text?
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.
hearing the Koran being recited, what did these Jewish
“Genies” conclude and what did they tell their people?
that they should invite tell the Jewish people to follow
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
"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.
according to Aminuddin Mohamad is in the Koran, which is
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” (…)
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
“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
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.
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 saught refuge.
Why were there
so many Jews in Yaçrib?
provides several political reasons for this and ends by
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.”
appeared as the last Prophet, Banu Quraiza said that his
theologians had settled in Yaçrib due to these predictions.
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?
Aminuddin Mohamad tells us, according to the Arab
traditions, is true, why are Western historians silent about
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).
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
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,
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
That the Jews
of Arabia, at Mohammed’s time were awaiting the imminent
arrival of the Messiah is confirmed by what is said by
“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
"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"
Judeus no Islã, Xenon ed., 1990, p. 90. Original
edition, The Jews of Islam, Princeton University
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
“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).
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.
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.
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:
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.
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:
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.
Western History books mention these data confessed in
Why would it be
a taboo to study the origins of Islam under a historic
perspective, something that we are doing in this brief
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:
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.
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.
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).
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
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).
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).
going to Yaçrib – the Hijrah – marks the beginning of the
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).
"The Jews of
Medina and the Peace Treaty with Them"
“The Jews of Medina, that were Jews by race (not converts) came from other areas and settled in Medina. Some historians believe that they were not of the Jewish race, but rather that they had converted to Judaism, because they notice a difference in the nature of true Jews and those who came from Arabia. They say that the Jews, although they are scattered almost the world over, never change their names; they use only Jewish names. However, a peculiarity of the Arab Jews is that they used pure Arab names. For example: Haris, Nadhir, Cainucaa, etc. Secondly, Jews by nature are cowardly and shy. And that is why, when Moses told them to fight the enemy, they answered:
your lord go fight. We will wait here” (Chap. 5, verse 24)
“But on the contrary, the Jews of Medina were brave” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit.,, p. 168).
these two statements are anti-Semitic and false.
adopt the names of other peoples. This is what happens all
over the Western countries, particularly in the Iberian
Peninsula, where the Jews usually took on Christian names.
As for the
accusation of cowardice made against the Jewish people, it
is absurd, for even recent history proves it wrong.
Mohamad goes on:
“There were three Jewish tribes in Medina, Banu Cainocaa, Banu Nadhir, and Quraiza, that had settled in the surroundings of Medina and had built forts and citadels (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 169).
The book we are studying goes on saying that:
“The Jews, in order to keep their monopoly in Medina, did not want these two tribes – [Ansar and Khazrij] – to unite again.
“And still about Mohammed’s appearance, the same Jews in their disputes with the inhabitants of Medina told them that they were waiting for the last Prophet [the Messiah of Israel] and that, when he arrived, they would join him and become victorious over them.
the Prophet came, whom they recognized from the signs as
being the promised Prophet, they rejected him only because
he descended from Ishmael and was not a Jew. The Jews
started to nurture hatred and enmity for the Muslims since
the day the prophet arrived in Medina, just as they
concocted conspiracies against Mohammed and the Muslims,
which they have gone on doing. But some of them recognized
the truth and joined Islam, like Abdullah Bin Salam and
others” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 169).
From this text, and from all of Aminuddin Mohamad’s book, it is inferred that at least a group or sect of Jews in Arabia prepared, launched, and recognized Mohammed as their awaited Messiah, but that, soon after, other Jews started to reject Mohammed as the Jewish Messiah, because he was Arab and not from Israel. This text can then explain so many texts in the Koran that are favorable to Israel, such as the anti-Trinity and anti-Christian texts. It also becomes clear why there was a rupture later between Arabs and Jews regarding Mohammed.
And the Centro de Divulgação do Islam’s book goes on saying that:
Islam is a
religion of peace, that it tries to promote peace throughout
the world, among all peoples, and that Mohammed was a worker
of peace. The word “Islam”, in Arabic, is synonymous to
peace” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 169).
We copied the
above text, exactly as it is in Aminuddin Mohamad’s book,
even though it goes against the wish of the author of the
article, where he states that he wants to destroy the myth
of the crucified redeemer, which is a strange way of
extraordinary book we are studying here says more:
“Mohammed, with open arms, approached the Jews, since he came to confirm the religion brought by Moses and not to contradict it. At that time, the Muslims still turned to Jerusalem for their daily prayers, just as the Jews did. So, the Jews were also favorably inclined toward Mohammed, toward the well-being, prosperity and freedom for Medina and its inhabitants. For such, a pact would have to be created and put into practice, as soon as possible, before any disagreement could arise. So, under Mohammed’s guidance, a pact was immediately written and signed by all groups” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 169 . The highlights are ours).
what is confessed in the Centro de Divulgação do Islam’s
“Mohammed, with open arms, approached the Jews, once he wanted to confirm the religion brought by Moses and not to contradict it.”
We are not making any accusations. It is those accountable for disseminating Islam that are confessing:
“Mohammed came to confirm the religion brought by Moses and not to contradict it".
And for such Mohammed made a pact with the Jews.
What did this pact say?
Aminuddin Mohamad quotes some items of this pact between the Jews and the Muslims:
document of the treaty is considered one of the most ancient
documents recorded in the world. [Sic!!! Is it necessary
to prove the absurdity of this presumption?] The renowned
historian Ibn Hicham transcribed the treaty’s whole text,
which is very long, with 40 articles. Here we present just a
summary of the pact:
"1 – The retaliation and indemnity system that is being practiced will continue;
"2 – The Jews will have religious freedom and nobody has the right to interfere in their religious matters;
"3 – Jews and Muslims, if in war with third parties, will support each other;”
was signed more than 1,400 years ago. Has there ever been
any other example of any Prophet or reformer entering a
peace treaty with those professing a rival faith?” (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., pp. 170-171. Our bold).
We must agree that: there has never been any other example of any Prophet or reformer entering a peace treaty with those professing a rival faith.”
This leads to
the fact that Islam was not, at least in the beginning,
Judaism’s rival faith. Not only were they not rivals but
instead they had a mutual support pact in case of war.
And why wasn’t
there an equal pact with the Christians in Arabia?
And why, in all Christian territories conquered by the Muslims, the result was almost always the extinction of Christianity?
alliance pact between Muslims and Jews reinforces the
hypothesis that in the beginning, Mohammed was considered
the Messiah by a Jewish sect in Arabia.
With this military alliance established between Muslims and Jews in Medina, Mohammed could start his wars to dominate the Arab peninsula, starting by conquering Mecca.
is Turned to Jerusalem
of Mecca, despite bowing before idols, had a notion that
their Quibla was the Kaaba, founded by Adam, renewed by
Abraham and his son Ishmael, considered their spiritual
also the adepts of the book (Jews and Christians) that had
their Quibla in Jerusalem or Bethlehem. When the prophet
Mohammed (S.A.W.) was in Mecca, he didn’t want to disregard
the Kaaba as the Quibla, but nonetheless he took Jerusalem,
the Prophets’ Quibla for thousands of years, as his Quibla.
In Mecca it was possible to unite both and so he did, so
that when he woke up to pray, he turned his face to the
north, having the Kaaba in front of him, and Jerusalem too,
since it was located to the north of Mecca; thus he united
both the Quibla of the sons of Ishmael and the Quibla of the
sons of Israel (Jacob)” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. p.
This means that Mohammed, from the very start, accepted the Quibla of the Jews. He prayed like the Jews: turned to Jerusalem. But, not to scandalize the Arabs of Mecca, he pretended to pray turned to the Kaaba, positioning himself in such a way as to have the Kaaba and Jerusalem in front of him. Thus, the Arab idolaters thought that he continued to pray turned to the Kaaba, as was their custom, when in fact, he was turned to Jerusalem, like the Jews. Mohammed was a secret proselyte of the Jews, or at least adept to a Jewish Arabian sect that awaited the Messiah for soon.
But when he
emigrated to Medina, then it was no longer possible to unite
both, because Mecca is located to the south of Medina and
Jerusalem to the north.
[Mohammed] “had to chose one of the Quiblas and he chose the Quibla of the previous Prophets, the sons of Israel, and that was Jerusalem. So, when the Prophet built the Massjid of Medina the Quibla was turned to the north, that is, the direction of Jerusalem” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 183. Our bold).
while the Prophet was in Mecca, he united both Quiblas when
he prayed by turning his head to the north, finding both
Jerusalem and the Kaaba at the same time. But since the
purpose of the Quibla was to give the believers a new,
distinct symbol, this purpose was not being met because the
idolaters of Mecca also had the Kaaba as their Quibla. So,
in order to establish a distinction from them too, the
Prophet prayed at Makam Ibrahim (Abraham’s place) whose
vestiges still exist today, turning toward the north
(Jerusalem), because compared with the idolaters, the
Christians and the Jews still had some consideration for God
in accepting the holy books”.
“But in Medina,
after the emigration, it was no longer possible to unite
both Quiblas. However, the Prophet in Medina still prayed
turned to the north (Jerusalem) for sixteen months, but
always anxious to receive God’s commandment to change the
direction of the Quibla to the south (Kaaba in Mecca), the
original Quibla” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op cit. p. 186).
that Mohammed, while in Mecca, simulated praying toward the
Kaaba, but that when he went to Medina, dominated by the
Jews, he clearly adopted the Quibla of the Jews: Jerusalem.
He “chose the Quibla of the children of Israel”.
Mohammed had become a Jewish proselyte.
sixteen years in Medina, with the crisis between Muslims and
Jews, Mohammed adopted the Quibla of Mecca once again, thus
publicly braking up with the Jews, who up to them had had a
very strong influence upon him.
Break their Pact with Islam -
Conspiracy of Some Jews against Mohammed’s Life
Mohammed’s victory over the Koraishite in the battle of Badr
in the year 624, according to the Hijra, Mohammed’s power
took hold in Medina but, at the same time, the Jews began to
solemn pact, all the groups of Medina (including non-Arab
ones) – [Meaning the Jews] – recognized Mohammed as its
administrator. Now, the results of the battle of Badr
awakened the Jews to the fact that Mohammed was winning the
hearts of the inhabitants of Medina and that they would soon
all join Islam. And so what would become of the dream of
establishing a Jewish kingdom in Arabia? They thought of the
need to undermine his influence, but how? The Arabs of Mecca
fought against him and lost. So, the Jews thought of
adopting a few tricks and weapons such as speaking ill of
him and his religion to his people, intrigues and treason.
These ill intentions were already in their minds long before
Badr, but now it was high time to put them into practice.”
“Many Jews, including Abdullah Bin Ubai joined Islam, but not truly, according to the Koran (Chap. II, verse 8). (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 213).
“The Jews had three tribes in the surroundings of Medina: Cainuca, Nahdir, and Curaiza. They were capitalists, farmers, and traders. The Jews of Cainuca were considered the bravest and most valiant, and this is why they always carried concealed weapons. In addition to religious influence – because before embracing Islam the Ansar were mostly idolatrous and ignorant, and like the Jews, they accepted the Book – [the Bible, that is, because the Koran didn’t exist. So, the Book is the Bible] – the Ansar looked up to them respectfully and treated them as more learned. (…)
arrived, the Jews saw that their unfair power [over the
people of Medina] – was being jeopardized and its days were
counted. As Islam grew in Medina, the religious influence of
the Jews diminished and as the Ansar got richer they freed
themselves financially from the Jews. And when this
financial influence was over, the secret of the Jews began
to be revealed. When the Prophet arrived in Medina, he had
signed an alliance and good relationship agreement with them
granting them religious freedom. But the Prophet had to
condemn their bad deeds. So, the Koran says the following
about the Jews:
fond of) listening to falsehood, of devouring anything
forbidden” (Chap. 5, verse 42). “And of their
taking usury when they were forbidden it, and of their
devouring people's wealth by false pretences”. (Chap. 4,
“When the Koran
began to expose their corruption, they were enraged and
started to conspire against Islam and the Prophet’s person (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit. p. 215).
“But after the
battle of Badr the Muslims became stronger. The Jews,
fearing that Islam was about to become an unbeatable force,
unilaterally revoked the agreement with Mohammed” (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 216).
The Jews ended
up causing incidents that led the Jewish Cainuca tribe to
rebel against Mohammed.
the Muslims were left with no other alternative than to
fight against the Banu Cainuca Jews, otherwise Islam would
deteriorate politically” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p.
were defeated and had to emigrate from Medina:
by Ubadah Bin Samit, the Jews from Banu Cainuca were allowed
to leave and emigrate from Medina in punishment for their
actions. So, they went to Wadi Al-Cura, where they remained
for some time and then moved toward the north of Arabia,
near “Azriat”, next to the border with Syria, where they
settled (in old Basan) (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p.
After the murder of several “missionaries” sent by Mohammed to the Arab tribes, Aminuddin Mohamad’s book says that “these two consecutive tragedies, following the great tragedy of Ohud, encouraged the Jews and the hypocrites of Medina to raise their heads against the Prophet. The hypocritical Jews and the idolaters had already united against Mohammed and started conspiring against him. The Prophet had already noticed that” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., pp. 243).
This act of
treason by the Jews against Mohammed was possibly a
consequence of some Jews not recognizing him as the Messiah,
but this is still a mere hypothesis in our study.
Aminuddin Mohammed talks of an indemnity payment that the Jews of the Banu Nadhir had refused to pay.
Mohammed, followed by Abu Bakr, Omar, and Ali would have gone to the Jewish neighborhood of Banu Nadhir to address this problem.
“The Jews received them cordially and feigned friendliness having them sit under a great wall of the palace. Pretending to go out to call other Jews, they started to take their distance, whispering that that would be a good opportunity to kill the four of them. Someone would go up the castle and drop a rock on the Prophet and his three companions, smashing them. Noticing their attitude, the Prophet started to suspect a conspiracy. However, a Jew called Amar Bin Jahash Bin Kaab went up the castle furtively to drop the rock; but before they could carry out their plan, God informed the Prophet of the conspiracy of the Jews, thus confirming his suspicion. The Prophet left the site immediately with his companions and without uttering a word set out to Medina. The Jews wanted to call him back, but the Prophet said to them: “You conspire to kill me! We no longer trust you and with this you are breaking the agreement you had with me”. The Jews neither denied the Prophet’s statement nor apologized” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 244).
tried to reach an agreement with the Jews of Banu Nadhir,
but they did not budge in their resistance and looked for
the support of “the Banu Qurayza, the other Jewish tribe”
(Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 244. Our bold).
Prophet asked the Banu Qurayza, the other congener Jewish
tribe to renew the previous agreement with them. They
accepted. Nevertheless the Banu Nadhir kept to their
position, and did not agree to make a new commitment” (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 244).
Mohammed demanded that if the Banu Nadhir did not make the agreement, they should leave the surroundings of Medina. The Banu Nadhir then prepared to wage war against the Prophet. The latter surrounded them and forced them to leave. “Only two of them, Yamin Bin Amr and Abu Saad Ibn Wahab remained in Medina, because they converted to Islam” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 245).
Aminuddin Mohamad gives us very valuable information:
“By then, the Prophet had a Jewish scribe charged with his correspondance with the Hebrews, but since the Jews had proved to be traitors, they could no longer be trusted, particularly regarding top state and Muslim secrets. A trustworthy scribe was needed. For such, the Prophet ordered Zaid Bin Sabit, a young man from Medina to learn Hebrew to take charge of the Prophet’s correspondence. Zaid Bin Sabit, besides being a revelation scribe during the Prophet’s lifetime, he was also trusted with the task of compiling the Koran during the caliphate of Abu Bakr, the first caliph” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 246. Our bold and underlining.
So, Mohammed’s primitive scribe was also Jewish!
And Mohammed’s correspondence was done in Hebrew!!
And this correspondence was so abundant that the new scribe had to learn Hebrew.
So, don’t tell
us that Mohammed’s correspondence was in Hebrew in order for
him to communicate with the common Jew, who did not speak
Hebrew, but Aramaic. At that time, only the rabbis and the
scholars of the Torah and the Talmud read, wrote, and spoke
And this scribe, Zaid Bin Sabit, whose name sounds like being of Jewish origin, wrote the first compilation of the Koran.
It is not without reason that in the Koran – as we will see in a future study, God permitting – there are so many terms of Jewish origin, and so many verses copied from the rabbinic Midrashes.
us about an episode of calumny and defamation of Aicha, one
of Mohammed’s wives. The case is of interest for the change
made in the Koran, which since then required four witnesses
to prove adultery (Cfr. Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., pp. 256
and Koran, 24: 4-5).
The Siege of
Medina or the Battle of the Ditch
The author we
are summarizing here tells us that the Jewish tribe of Banu
Nadhir, after emigrating from Medina, never stopped
conspiring against Mohammed.
Their leaders organized a general coalition of idolaters and Jews against Mohammed’s followers (Cfr Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 257).
managed to lead all the notable tribes against Mohammed; it
could be said that it was a war against believers on one
side and all the allied unbelievers of the Arabic peninsula
on the other” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 244).
This text shows
that there were Jews resolved to combat Mohammed as the
false Messiah (as a Prophet), while other Jews continued to
believe in Mohammed as the Prophet, that is, as the
promised Messiah awaited by the Jews.
became even worse for Mohammed, when the Jewish tribe of
Banu Qurayza changed sides and joined the conspirators.
Prophet got news that the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza had
also joined the enemy against the Muslims, he sent Saa’d Bin
Maadh, chief of the Auss [another Jewish tribe], an ally of
Banu Qurayza and Saad Bin Ubadah, chief of the Khazrij [also
a Jewish tribe], to investigate the case with the Jews and
to advise them to go back on their decision.
“These men got there, tried to convince them by explaining and in every way reminding them of the agreement that used to be between them and the Muslim; but the Jews refused to accept the Prophet’s request and rudely replied by saying: “We don’t know any Mohammed, and we don’t have any agreement with him” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 261).
resulted in the siege of Medina that was saved thanks to a
stratagem devised by a Persian, who advised the Muslims to
make a ditch around Medina. This afforded them a long
resistance time, until an important ally of the Jews sided
with Mohammed, and owing to his intrigues, gave Mohammed the
“Even in these difficult moments, the pure souls continued to join Islam. An old man called Nuaim Bin Massud, of the Ghatfan tribe, a great friend of the Jews’, left the ranks of unbelievers and presented himself to the Prophet asking to join Islam” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 265. Our bold).
Nuaim Bem Masssud, hiding his conversion to Islam and his having joined Mohammed, created such a web of intrigue among the several allied groups against Mohammed that they started to split up. They began to complain that the siege of Medina was taking too long and so, at last, the Jewish tribe of the Banu Qurayza declared:
Saturday (Sabbath), that is, compulsory rest required by our
religion, so we cannot fight tomorrow; and besides, we
will not take part in this battle unless you leave hostages
as a guarantee that you won’t leave us” (Aminuddin Mohamad,
op. cit., p. 226. Our bold).
As a result, Mohammed’s enemies ended up by suffering a huge defeat.
And we point out that these tribes observed the Sabbath.
The End of
“Prior to that,
the Prophet had made an agreement with the Jews, ensuring
them total safety, freedom of living, wealth, and religion,
but the latter did not respect the agreement and rebelled,
as it has already been mentioned. The Prophet wanted to
renew the agreement with them, but the Banu Nadhir tribe
refused to and was expelled from Medina. The Banu Qurayza
tribe, however, accepted to renew the agreement and they
went on living in peace and safety” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op.
cit., p. 268).
battle of the Ditch, the Banu Qurayza were surrounded by the
Muslims in their castle and had no means of winning.
Kaab Bin Assad, finding himself surrounded and without means
of fighting off the Muslims, gathered his people and
presented them with three proposals:
“In the first
one he said: “There is nothing to doubt about Mohammed’s
prophecy, because the Torah, that is our sacred book,
speaks clearly of his arrival, and he is the Prophet we were
waiting for. So, we had better believe him and end this
enmity in order to save our lives and wealth. However, his
people did not accept this proposal and refused to join
Islam” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 269. Our bold
Banu Qurayza resisted, they ended up by accepting what was
decided by the chief of the Auss, the other Jewish tribe –
who sentenced all the Bonu Coraiza men to death, between 400
and 600 of them.
was in full agreement with the law of war of the time,
and in compliance with what is written in the Torah”(Bible)
(Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 270. Our bold.)
So, it becomes
very clear from what is expressed in the Centro de
Divulgação do Islam para a América Latina’s book:
Mohammed, in this case, abided by the Torah.
And it is
reconfirmed by the same book in the following words:
prophetic traditions it is recorded that the Prophet, when
he heard Saad’s decision, said: You based your decision on
the divine laws” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 270.
Mohammed’s Attempted Pilgrimage to Mecca
Six years after
the Hijra –Mohammed’s escape to Medina – he wanted to go
back to his native city to pray at the Kaaba.
prayed in its direction and they were the continuators of
Abraham’s mission” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit.,p. 283)
The same author
said before that in Medina Mohammed had established that
prayers should be said facing Jerusalem and not toward the
Kaaba. (Cfr. Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., pp. 83 e 183).
It should be
emphasized that the Muslims regarded themselves – as they
still do – as the continuators of Abraham’s mission.
Mohamad says that in the sixth year of the Hijra, Mohammed
left Medina with 1,400 men to pray in Mecca.
“They put on
the “Ihram”- [“a white gown worn by pilgrims”] – with the
intention of going on an “Umra” [short pilgrimage] and took
with them 70 camels for “Curban” [sacrifice] (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 284).
someone to tell the Koraishite that he was coming as a
“Tell them that we did not come to fight, but rather for an Umra and the proof is in the sacrificial animals and the Ihram” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit.,p. 285).
quotations above provide very interesting information:
1) First, that the Muslims sacrificed animals, now something prohibited among them;
second, that things destined to be sacrificed to God were
This word is
the same used by the Pharisees, based on the Mishnah, to
designate something consecrated to God, according to what is
written in Mark’s Gospel:
“But you say
that if a man says to his father or mother: 'Whatever help
you might otherwise have received from me is Curban (that
is, a gift devoted to God), then you no longer let him do
anything for his father or mother; thus you nullify the word
of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you
do many things like that" (Mark 7: 11).
Christ condemned the Pharisee custom of considering something a Curban, a gift to God, so that it won’t be given to the parents.
The word Curban and this Pharisee custom came from the Mishnah (Cfr. Mishnah, Nedarim treaty, I, 2-3-4)
From this it
can be concluded that the Muslims had learned the practice
of the Curban from the “Genies of Israel”, that is, the
Jewish rabbis that had taught them in the beginning of
Islam. So, originally, the Muslims were a Jewish Messianic
sect that obeyed the Mishnah, as much as possible. Later,
other rabbis refused to see Mohammed as the last Prophet
awaited by Israel, that is, the Messiah, because Mohammed
was an Arab and not a Jew, and because he dared to recognize
Christ as a Prophet, something the more radical rabbis could
not tolerate. And finally, there was the issue of the Quibla
of Jerusalem having been abandoned by Mohammed; hence, the
split of the Jews with Islam.”
At that time, Mohammed’s followers honored him with a cult, with practices that would be repeated in many Messianic sects in the Middle Ages and even in the 20th century:
Koraishite witness that visited the Muslim camp when
Mohammed tried to visit Mecca to pray next to the Kaaba
“I have never seen a king among your men as I saw Mohammed among his companions; his companions like him and honor him so that they carefully pick up every hair of his that falls on the ground; when he washes himself they don’t let one single drop of water fall to the ground; and they almost fight to use this water, and they rub it on their bodies. When he speaks there is total silence and nobody exchanges glances with him” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 287).
Massud As-Sacafi, leader of the Arabs from Taif, witnessed
this cult of Mohammed, and said that he had never seen
anyone do this for any king.
But the same was done for the pseudo Messiah Tanchelm in the Middle Ages and for others in the 20th century.
If Urwah Bin
Massue As-Sacafi had not seen this done for any one else, I
have… Children, I have.
Mohammed didn’t succeed in entering Mecca, but a truce was
reached in Hudaibiya between him and the Koraishite that
would allow Mohammed with his followers to go to Mecca on
pilgrimage in the following year, under certain conditions.
Mohammed’s Victory over the Jews of Khaibar
in the year 629, or the seventh year of the Hijra.
After some Jewish groups split up from Islam because they did not accept an Arab Messiah, or the fact that he recognized Christ as a prophet, these Jewish groups left for Khaibar, where they organized several fortifications.
“The Jews of Banu Nadhir and Banu Qurayza – [that had followed Mohammed in the beginning of his preaching, accepting him as the awaited Prophet, that is as the Messiah of Israel] – when they were expelled from Medina they settled in Khaibar; the hearts of these Jews were filled with hatred and enmity for the Muslims. They started conspiring against the Muslims and carrying with them other Arab tribes hostile to Mohammed (the reader will remember that it was by this great effort by these Jews that all the tribes mobilized against Mohammed, followed by the battle of the Ditch that made Medina tremble)” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 306).
“(…) the new
leader of the Jews, called Ussair Bin Razzan, summoned all
the Jewish tribes and gave a speech” [inciting them to
fight] (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 306).
community that lived in Khaibar was strongest, the
wealthiest, and the best equipped for war than any Arab
people. These Jews knew that that would be their last
deployment against Mohammed; if they lost they would be
treated as the Jews of Banu Qurayza had been” (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 309).
the narrative we are following, Mohammed had 1,600 men with
him, of which one hundred were riders, while the Jews had
more than 20,000 warriors (Cfr. Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit.,
combats, a Jewess called Sufiya Bin Huyay Bin Akhtab, the
daughter of Buna Nadhir and Khana Bin Rabi Bin Ubai Al
Hokaik’s wife, was captured and married to Mohammed. Later
she received the title of “Mother of the Believers” (Cfr.
Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., pp., 313- 314).
kept all the plunder, but the copies of the Torah were given
back to the Jews. This behavior was completely different
from that of the Romans toward the Jews when they conquered
Jerusalem, when they burned and trampled on all the Sacred
Writings they could lay their hands on inside the temple.
“This was also different from the attitude of the Christians when they chased the Jews away from the Iberian Peninsula and burned all the copies of the Torah. With this for comparison we ask: Who is more tolerant?” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. p 315).
Well, this is
completely false, for the Church always admitted the Old
Testament as true. What they sometimes burned were copies of
the Talmud and not the Old Testament, which the Catholic
Church recognizes as an integral part of the divine
victory, Mohammed did not exterminate these Jewish tribes;
instead he pardoned them and let them work in the fields,
and charged only an annual tax on their harvests.
Mohammed’s book states several times that Islam advocates
equality among men and that it condemns racism. However,
regarding the Jews, this condemnation of racism is not so
clear, for in the book we are summarizing, one can read:
conquest of Khaibar, the Prophet and the Muslims remained
there for a few more days. He had already granted the Jews
total safety; however they are a people with bad instincts
and cannot be trusted” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. p 315).
And to prove
it, a new Jewish attempt to murder Mohammed is told:
Mohammed’s book it can be read that “Until that date, the
Muslims faced aggressions from all sides and so they were
more concentrated in defense and so they were not able to
spend much time learning Islam in detail. In spite of that,
through the efforts of the Prophet, illiteracy, that was
very common in Arabia, was already eradicated among the
“All of them could read and write; and now the children of nomads, barbarians, drunkards, etc. had become, in a single action, theologians, professors, historians, statesmen, administrators, generals, and pious men” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. p 318).
From the high
number of alphabetized people, however, we have to exclude
Mohammed, who remained an illiterate until his death.
decided on the order of the prayers and on prohibitions
regarding food, which were very similar to the Jewish ones.
“Now that daily prayers, in congregation, were instituted, as well as fasting, charity, and the prohibition of alcoholic beverages, additional social reforms followed, according to Aicha, the Prophet’s wife: “The reforms were gradual and in time.” From that time also date the prohibitions of eating animals that use their front paws or claws to eat, the prohibition of eating carnivore animals and birds, the prohibition of eating the meat of donkeys and mules, the prohibition of “Mutá” (temporary marriage practiced in the times of ignorance – before Islam – and in its beginning) and the prohibition of having sexual intercourse with one’s wife before knowing for sure that her uterus is free. So, a month has to elapse and, if she is pregnant, she has to give birth first. In that same year it was also prohibited to sell gold and silver in unequal molds” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. p. 318).
– The Conquest of Mecca
In the year
630, the eighth of the Hijra, Mohammed left with 10,000 men
to conquer Mecca.
took place almost without any fighting, meeting only with a
Mohamad tells us that Mohammed divided his troops to enter
the city from several different directions, recommending
that no blood be shed, and that weapons be used only in case
of a deadly attack.
“When the four divisions were ready to march, the Prophet heard Saad Bin Ubadah say: “Today is the day of the battle, a day of great war, the day in which all prohibitions are abolished”. Upon hearing these words, the Prophet said: “No! Saad you are mistaken; today is the day in which God will exalt the Kaaba”, and then he removed Saad Bin Ubadah from his post of chief and put his son Kais in his place. The Prophet tried this because after hearing those words, if he had let Saad Bin Ubadah in his post, he [the commander] would have certainly gone against the Prophet’s orders of not shedding blood in Mecca” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit. , p. 339. Our underlining and bold).
proclaimed, that the day of Mohammed’s victory would be
the day in which all the prohibitions would be abolished”,
was exactly what the Jewish Cabala also proclaimed, and
which the Jews in general believed; that the day of the
awaited Messiah’s triumph would also be the day in
which all the prohibitions would be abolished”.
Ubadah’s words were impregnated with Jewish Messianism. This
Saad Bin Ubadah had already been introduced by Aminuddin
Mohamad as a Jew, the chief of the Jewish tribe of Khazrij
(Cfr. Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 261).
So, Saad Bin
Ubadah was one of the Jews that had accepted Mohammed as the
last Prophet awaited by the Jews: the Messiah of Israel.
What is curious is that Mohammed hurried to deny Saad Bin Ubadah’s Messianic anomism and to destitute him from his commanding position, substituting him by Saad Bin Ubadah’s son – who was also a Jew, of course.
In so doing, Mohammed was refusing the Jewish Messianic anomism – which will probably be another cause for the split between the Jews and Mohammed – without really wanting to break his bonds with the Jews completely, since he gave the command to Saad Bin Ubadah’s son.
Such anomistic expectation – the abolition of all prohibitions – of the messianic kingdom, refused by Mohammed when he took Mecca, was eventually perpetuated in Shiite Islam. The duodecimal Shiite Muslims believed that with the arrival of the hidden Imam, Imam Mahdi, the lawful prohibitions would be abolished (Cfr. Henry Corbin, En Islam Iranien, Gallimard, Paris, 1971, 4 vol.; and Christian Jambet, La Grande Réssurection d' Alamut, Verdier, Dijon, 1990).
The conquest of
Mecca is presented by Aminuddin Mohamad as the realization
of a Moses’ Deuteronomy text.
was already preparing his entry in the city and so the
Bible’s prophecy was being fulfilled:
"2- And he
said, The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto
them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with
ten thousands of saints: from his right hand [went] a
fiery law for them. Deuteronomy 33:2." (Aminuddin Mohamad,
op. cit., p. 340. Our bold).
Now, the true
Deuteronomy text is a little different from this one quoted
above. In the true text there is no number ten. And
the ending is also different, as it says: “To his right a
fiery law” (Deut. 33:2).
conquest of Mecca, Mohammed supposedly destroyed all the
idols and paintings of the Kaaba, thus putting an end to
idolatry among the Arabs.
“After the speech and pardon granted to his enemies, the Prophet entered the Kaaba and saw that its walls were filled with paintings of angels and prophets. There were statues of Abraham and Ishmael, represented with guessing arrows in their hands and also a statue of Jesus” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 343).
After the Conquest of Mecca -
The Ansar, who
had received Mohammed in Medina, feared that after having
conquered his city of birth [Mecca] he would never return to
convinced them of the contrary, promising them that he would
always live there with them.
The conquest of
Mecca and the joining of the Koraishite to Islam made it
much easier for all the other Arab tribes to join Mohammed’s
It is said that
around that time one of Mohammed’s Coptic wives, called
Maria, had a son by him, called Ibrahim, who lived only
Mohamad tells us about some of Mohammed’s marital problems.
We will limit ourselves to copying what the Centro de
Divulgação do Islam para a América Latina’s book says:
spent all his life away from luxury and consumed very little
food; sometimes he even starved. In his whole life he never
had two meals in a row or even full meals. But unlike him,
his wives were not inspired. They were subject to the same
feelings that other women usually are; this is why the
Prophet’s wives were more delicate, they still enjoyed
beauty and luxury. Even though they lived side by side with
God’s Messenger they were not special. Their normal human
instincts were not eliminated, because they came from
distinctive and noble families and had been raised in
luxury. For example, Umm Habiba was the daughter of the
Koraishite chief (Abu Sufiyan); Jaweiryah was the daughter
of the great chief of Khaibar [and therefore Jewish]; AIcha
was the daughter of Abu Bakr; and Hafsa was Omar’s daughter.
So, now that the Prophet had spent more money and time with
his wife Maria after she gave birth to a baby boy, they did
not want to be denied this privilege, especially now that
the Islamic country had become rich from much loot. They
thought that a small percentage of this should be enough to
provide them comfort and a relatively high living standard.
Besides, based on human instincts, there was rivalry among
the wives, and each one wanted to stand out further in the
Prophet’s love” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., pp. 363-364).
This gave rise
to an incident among Mohammed’s other wives that had turned
against Maria for having given him a certain kind of honey.
Aicha and Hafsa hassled Mohammed.
“What Aicha and
Hafsa were demanding was their private matter, but in
addition to that, there was another issue that generated
conflict among the wives, caused by these pressures put on
him. They demanded extended and increased provisions and
more money for household expenses” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op.
cit. p. 365).
Prophet could not accept their demands, he was so stirred by
these demands that he decided not to be with them for a
whole month. This coincided with the Prophet’s falling from
his horse and injuring his leg; so, he isolated himself on
the upper floor of his house, placing his servant “Rabah”
[Sic!] at the door, refusing to talk to anyone about them” (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 365).
personal servant was called “Rabah”…
And why the
Rabah is a
typically Jewish name.
So, there were
Jews that remained faithful to Mohammed and accepted him as
the Messiah of Israel, or the “last Prophet”!
had a Jewish scribe to write down his revelations, compile
them, and who was in charge of his Hebrew correspondence,
obviously not with the Japanese, but rather with the
“genies”, or rabbis, of Israel, whom he must have consulted
whenever he had doubts about the book, as recommended in
Surah lunes (Surah 10: 94).
He also had a
Jewish wife, Sufiya Bin Huyay Bin Akhtab, the daughter of
the chief of the Banu Nadhir.
And now we
learn that his personal servant was called “Rabah”.
Let’s go back
to copying this very interesting book by Aminuddin Mohamad’s.
saw the Prophet by himself they thought he had divorced all
his wives, which wasn’t true. The Prophet could not waste
time with those family disputes (…) The Prophet, with this
separation period, wanted to give his wives some time to
think over their demands and wait for their jealousy to
decrease, but all over Medina there was talk that the
Prophet had divorced his wives. The Muslims were worried
about this situation” (Aminuddin Mohamad, op. cit., p. 365).
“Omar Ibn Al-Khattab
– [the future Caliph] – said:
we had no consideration whatsoever for our wives; it wasn’t
until God revealed about them and their rights that we
started showing consideration for them. One day I
reprimanded my wife about something and she answered me
back, assertively: I, finding that strange, asked her: “Are
you answering me back in this assertive way?” And she
replied: “I am amazed at you, son of Khattab! You don’t like
it when I answer you back, while your own daughter (Hafsa)
criticizes and answers back to her husband (the Prophet
Mohammed) and she does so in such a loud way that the
Prophet himself becomes anxious and distressed all day”.
this I took my cloak and went straight to my daughter Hafsa,
married to the Prophet, and asked her: My daughter! Is it
true that you ague with the Prophet and criticize him so
loudly that he becomes anxious and distressed all day?”
confessed, by saying: “Yes! I and the other wives are used
to criticizing him”. So, I said: “I fear that you will
suffer from God’s revenge and the wrath of his Messenger, o
ye my daughter! Don’t let yourself be fooled by that woman
that became too vain because of her beauty and Mohammed’s
love for her.” Then I left and went to see Ummi Salma and
asked her the same thing. Ummi Salma answered: O ye son of
Khattab, you are truly amazing! You want to meddle with
everything, even in the private affairs between the Prophet
and his wives”.
I was swept
over by shame, left there and went away”. (Aminuddin Mohamad,
op. cit., pp. 365-366).
The next day,
considering the increasing rumors about Mohammed’s divorce,
Omar insisted to be received by him, who finally agreed and
denied the rumors. After that, both went down together to
the first floor and right there and then, the following
verses of the Koran were revealed:
“O Herald of
the Hidden! Say to your wives, “If you desire the worldly
life and its adornment – therefore come, I shall give you
wealth and a generous release! And if you desire Allah and
His Noble Messenger and the abode of the Hereafter - then
indeed Allah has kept prepared an immense reward for the
virtuous among you” (Koran, Surah 33:28-29) (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 365).
Mohamad doesn’t quote the Koran perfectly on this, since
Surah 33:28, according to Samir el Hayek’s translation of
the Koran says:
"28 – O Herald
of the Hidden! Say to your wives, “If you desire the worldly
life and its adornment – therefore come, I shall give you
wealth and a befitting release.
"29 – And if
you desire Allah and His Noble Messenger and the abode of
the Hereafter - then indeed Allah has kept prepared an
immense reward for the virtuous among you” (Koran,
Surah 33, 29-29. Our bold to highlight the part that is in
the Koran and that Aminuddin Mohamad did not quote).
“In light of
this revelation, God ordered the Prophet to give his wives
an alternative and show them both worlds. However, they
repented acknowledging their mistake, recovered their common
sense, and chose the Prophet over the other world. This
revelation put an end to this matter, in a good manner, and
the Prophet went on living with them normally, recovering
the peace he needed to fulfill his mission.
"This was a
purely private affair between the Prophet and his wives” (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 367).
that this is a purely private affair, and that there is no
myth about it.
Appoints Abu Bakr to Represent Him at the Hajj
the ninth year of the Hijra appointed Abu Bakr to represent
him at the Hajj (the great pilgrimage to Mecca).
“Abu Bakr set
out for Mecca, taking along twenty-five sacrificial camels,
twenty of which were the Prophet’s and five of his own” (Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 380).
that the Muslims sacrificed animals like the Jews did in the
Temple, before its destruction.
himself went on the Hajj accompanied by 114,000 pilgrims and
only shortly before his death, in the tenth year of the
He went to
Mecca taking 100 sacrificial camels (Cfr. Aminuddin Mohamad,
op. cit., p. 398).
in the year 632.
after his death there was disagreement over Mohammed’s
succession. Out of the discussion Abu Bakr was elected
Islam’s Caliph and Mohammed’s substitute (Cfr. Aminuddin
Mohamad, op. cit., p. 423).
VIII - Conclusion
We remind you
that this study was written in reply to an aggressive and
blasphemous article written by a Muslim attacking the
divinity of Jesus Christ Our Lord, stating that it is
nothing more than a myth. The author injuriously compares
Christ to Adonis, Osiris, and other mythological beings and
explicitly states that he wants to destroy the “Myth” of
Jesus Christ, the Redeemer.
In this reply
we have limited ourselves almost only to providing
quotations from a book published by the Centro de
Divulgação do Islam para a América Latina, authored by
unsuspected volume provides precious information about what
actually happened in 7th century Arabia, when
Mohammed started preaching.
In his book,
Aminuddin Mohamad shows that there was a profound influence,
and even an alliance, between the Jews and Mohammed, at
least in the beginning of Islam. Aminuddin Mohamad
demonstrates that there were groups of Jews that awaited the
arrival of the “last Prophet’ of Israel, that is, the Jewish
Jewish “Genies” examined Mohammed and recognized in him
signs showing that he was indeed the “last Prophet”, that
is, the Messiah that would found the Messianic Kingdom.
Under the recommendation of these “genies” of Israel –
possibly Jewish rabbis – the Jewish tribes that lived around
Yaçrib, became Mohammed’s allies and provided him with
The Jews from
Arabia surrounded and involved Mohammed, instructed him,
deeply influenced his doctrine, which explicitly recognized
the Old Testament as The Book of God, by
excellence, gave him religious, political and military
support, greatly contributing to his victory. (In another
study, which will be written shortly, we will examine the
Jewish influence on the Arab Koran).
enough there was a crisis between the Jewish rabbis and
Mohammed, even though some of them went on supporting
Mohammed to the very end. Possibly, the fact that Mohammed
was an Arab led to his rejection as the Messiah by the more
orthodox rabbis, who could not accept a non-Jewish Messiah.
A second reason
for this rejection would have been Mohammed’s attitude
toward Jesus Christ. For Mohammed, Jesus was a Prophet and
not the Son of God, the incarnate Wisdom of God. But the
more radical rabbis could not even tolerate this: Christ
could not be considered even as a mere prophet.
third reason that led to the split between Mohammed and the
Jews of Arabia would have been the fact that Mohammed chose
the Kaaba of Mecca as the direction (Quibla) for Islam
praying, while before that he only prayed facing Jerusalem.
Mohammed would have refused the opinion of the rabbis that
only Jerusalem could be the city of the Prophets. The
adoption of Mecca as Quibla, instead of Jerusalem, was an
unequivocal sign that Mohammed wanted to free himself from
the rabbis that had instructed him and supported him in his
preaching, in order to make the new religion an Arab
religion, thus putting an end to the Jewish messianic dream,
as it had been initially imagined.
really be amazed at such a serious misjudgment on the part
of the few rabbis that accepted an Arab Messiah for Israel?
is not the only case in the History of Judaism. Sabbatai
Tzevi’s case, in the 17th century, was the most
scandalous case ever to happen in Jewish Messianism.
Sabbatai Tzevi’s case, the rabbis were unevenly divided.
Most of the rabbis accepted Sabbatai as the promised
Messiah. Few condemned him from the very start. Crowds of
Jews from the world over left their countries and put
everything down to go to Palestine to follow the triumphal
march of Messiah Sabbatai to Constantinople, where he would
convert the Turkish Sultan, and with his military support
would invade Italy, destroy the Pope, and Christianity.
At the last
minute, before the Sultan, Sabbatai repudiated Judaism and
became a Muslim (Cfr. Gershom Scholem, Sabbatai Sevi, The
Mystical Messiah, Princeton University Press, 1975).
happened to Mohammed: a pseudo Messiah that was initially
accepted and fostered by fanatical rabbis, only to end up in
abandonment and, finally, deception.
Otman Bin Affan was later charged with the elimination, as
thoroughly as possible, any traces of Jewish influence on
responsible for the current version of the Koran, in which
he established the order of the chapters according to
As we have
said, we are contemplating examining the text of the Koran
in another study.
In the Koran we
will see that several passages state that the true Koran was
given to Moses, and not to Mohammed. We will see that in the
current version of the Arab Koran it is admitted that
Mohammed only came to confirm what had been revealed to
Moses and the Jewish prophets.
We will also
see in that in the Arab Koran there is an enormous amount of
quotations from the Old Testament, the Talmud, the Mischnah,
the rabbinical comments (the Midrashes), all of them Jewish
books that Mohammed, being illiterate, could not have known
From all this
it can be concluded that the title “The Last Prophet” given
to Mohammed has the meaning of Messiah of Israel, that is,
of “the last Prophet of Israel”, a function he performed for
a very short time.
beginning, Islam was deeply involved with Judaism; hence
it’s being radically anti-Trinity. This involvement was
dramatically severed after a short alliance. Both groups
felt and said they had been betrayed. Israel felt cheated
and betrayed by a Prophet that it had fostered. Mohammed and
the Arabs felt betrayed by the Jews that had signed an
agreement with them. Wouldn’t it be possible that in this
initial drama and rupture is one of the causes of the
current opposition between Israel and Islam?
mutual accusation of betrayal has not contributed to appease
the old rivalry between Isaac and Ishmael.
From all this,
it can clearly be seen that historically, the myth is, in
fact, considering Mohammed the “last Prophet”… of the Arabs.
In Corde Jesu, semper, Orlando Fedeli
Fedeli, Orlando - "Mohammed: the origins of Islam"
MONTFORT Associação Cultural