The Bible and Society

How God’s Word is True

Posts Tagged ‘Quran’

Offensive and “art”

Posted by Mats on 12/09/2010

Posted in Islam | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »


Posted by Mats on 16/06/2009

By, Sujit Das

Respect for the faith of sincere believers cannot be allowed either to block or deflect the investigation of the historians … One must defend the rights of elementary historical methodology“.

——- Maxime Rodhinson, 1981; p. 57


(Photo Source: Wikipedia, 2009)


Gerd R Puin’s photo of one Sana’a Qur’an
parchment, showing layered revisions to the Qur’an

Muslims often say that both Old Testament and New Testament are corrupted and seriously changed. They say, for a Holy Scripture to be authoritative, it has to be preserved without any changes at all, and point to their Qur’an, which claims to have been revealed word by word and letter by letter to Muhammad by Allah. Qur’an claims, ‘no change there can be in the words of God‘ (10:64) and, ‘there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of God‘ (6:34).

But then how ridiculous the ‘doctrine of abrogation’ is, by which later revelations cancel previous ones, as Qur’an (2:106) confirms, ‘revelations… We abrogate or cause to be forgotten‘. Also, a Hadith (6:558) from Sahih Bukhari confirmed that Muhammad forgot many verses. Again Sunaan ibn Majah, (3: 1944) recorded that after Muhammad’s death some revelations were eaten by a goat. How divine words can be eaten, changed, cancelled or abolished, in spite of Allah’s specific claim in 10:64 and 6:34?

Are not all these claims of Allah self-contradictory? But amazingly; these plain truths do not bother the Muslims at all. Probably, if we can present another “authentic” Qur’an which is different from existing standard form, Muslims will give way to logical thinking.

The devastating truth is that a large number of ancient Qur’anic manuscripts, dating from first century of Hijra were discovered in the Great Mosque of Sana’a (Yemen) which significantly differs from the present standard one. Carbon dating system confirmed that these Qur’ans are not forged ones by religious rivalries. Moreover these Qur’ans were discovered by Muslims, not infidels.

Probably this is the most embarrassing event in Islamic history of 14 centuries.

The Great Mosque of Sana’a is one of the oldest Mosques in Islamic history. The date of building goes back to 6th year of Hijrah when Muhammad entrusted one of his companions to build a Mosque at Yemen, which was extended and enlarged by Islamic rulers from time to time.

In 1972, during the restoration of this Great Mosque (heavy rain had caused the west wall of the Mosque to collapse), laborers working in a crown space between the structure’s inner and outer roofs, stumbled across a amazing grave site, which they did not realize at that time because of ignorance. Mosques do not accommodate graves, and this site contained no gravestone, no human remains and no funeral relics. It contained nothing more, in fact, apparently looking an unappealing mountain of old parchment and paper documents, damaged books and individual pages of Arabic text, fused together by rain and dampness for over a thousand year.


(Photo Source: Dreibholz, 1999, p. 23)


Some of the Qur’anic parchment fragments in the

condition in which they were found.

The ignorant laborers gathered up the manuscripts, pressed them carelessly into some 20 potato sacks, and set them aside on the staircase of one of the Mosque’s minarets, where they were locked away. The manuscripts would have been forgotten once again, were it not for Qadhi Isma’il al-Akwa, then the President of Yemeni Antiquities Authority, who realized the potential importance of the find. Al-Akwa sought international assistance in examining and preserving the fragments, because no scholar in his country was capable of working on this rich find. In 1997, he managed to interest a visiting non-Muslim German scholar, who in turn persuaded the German government to organize and find a restoration project.

Soon after the project began, it became clear that the “paper grave” is a resting place for, among other things, tens of thousands of fragments from close to a thousand different codices of the Qur’an, the Muslim holy scripture. Muslim authorities during early days cherished the belief that worn out and damaged copies of the Qur’an must be removed from circulation leaving only the unblemished editions of the scripture for use. Also such a safe place was required to protect the books from looting or destruction if invaders come and hence the idea of a grave in the Great Mosque in Sana’a, which was a place of learning and dissemination of the Qur’an and was in existence from the first century of the Hijrah.

Restoration of the manuscript has been organized and supervised by Gerd R. Puin of Saarland University, Germany. Puin is a renowned specialist on Arabic calligraphy (the study of fine and artistic handwriting) and Qur’anic paleography (the study of ancient writing and documents). For ten years he extensively examined those precious parchment fragments. In 1985, his colleague H. C. Graf V. Bothmer joined him.

Carbon-14 tests date some of the parchments to 645-690 AD. Their real age may be somewhat younger, since C-14 estimates the year of the death of an organism (parchment is animal skin), and the process from that to the final writing on the parchment involves an unknown amount of time. Calligraphic dating has pointed to 710-715 AD. Some of the parchment pages seemed to date back to the seventh and eighth centuries, or Islam’s first two centuries, perhaps the oldest Qur’an in existence.

In 1984, the House of Manuscripts (Dar al Makhtutat) was founded close to the Great Mosque, as part of a cooperation project between Yemeni and German authorities. An enormous endeavor began to restore the Qur’anic fragments. Between 1983 and 1996, approximately 15,000 out of 40,000 pages were restored, specifically 12,000 fragments on parchment and manuscripts dating back to the seventh and eighth centuries.


(Photo Source: Dreibholz, 1999. p. 22)

Dar al-Makhtutat Library where the newly

acquired Manuscripts and cataloguing are stored.

Until now, only three ancient copies of the Qu’ran are found. The one preserved in the British Library in London, dates from the late seventh century and was thought to be the oldest one. But the Sana’a manuscripts are even older. Moreover, these manuscripts are written in a script that originates from the Hijaz – the region of Arabia where prophet Muhammad lived, which makes them not only the oldest to have survived, but one of the earliest authentic copies of the Qur’an ever. Hijazi Arabic is the script (Makkan or Madinan) in which the earliest Qur’an was written. Although these pieces are from the earliest Qur’an known to exist, they are also palimpsests (manuscripts on which the original writing has been effected for re-use).

The rare style of fine and artistic handwriting had fascinated both Puin and his friend Bothmer but more surprise was waiting for them. When these ancient Qur’ans were compared with the present standard one, both of them were stunned. The ancient texts were found to be devastatingly and disturbingly at odds with the existing form. There are unconventional verse ordering, small but significant textual variations, different orthography (spelling) and different artistic embellishment (decoration).

It scattered the orthodox Muslim belief that the Qur’an as it has reached us today is quite simply “the perfect, timeless, and unchanging Word of God”. It means Qur’an has been distorted, perverted, revised, modified and corrected, and textual alterations had taken place over the years purely by Human hands.

The sacred aura surrounding this Holy Scripture of Islam, which remained intact for over 14 centuries is gone with this astonishing discovery and the core belief of billion plus Muslims that the Qu’ran is the eternal, unaltered word of God is now clearly visible as a great hoax, a totally downright falsehood. Not only this; the Qur’anic claim that nobody can alter the words of God is also a fake. Qur’an is supposed to be, if we borrow words from Guillaume (1978, p. 74), “The holy of holies. It must never rest beneath other books, but always on top of them, one must never drink or smoke when it is being read aloud, and it must be listened to in silence. It is a talisman against disease and disaster“. Muslims call the Qur’an ‘Mother of Books’ and believe no other book or revelation can compare (Caner & Caner, 2002. p.84). However, it’s all gone now. The end result of whole Islamic struggle for fourteen centuries is a big zero.

As if it is not enough, many manuscripts showed the sign of palimpsests, i.e., versions very clearly written over even earlier washed off versions. The under-writing of palimpsest is, of course, often difficult to read visually, but modern tools such as ultraviolet photography can highlight them. It suggests that the Sana’a manuscripts are not the only variants, but, even before that, Qur’anic text had been modified and re-written on the same paper. It means, Allah’s claim (Q 56: 77-78; 85:21-22) that original text is preserved in heaven on golden tablets, which none can touch except angels is also a fairy-tale.

Puin after extensively studying these manuscripts came to the conclusion that the text is actually an evolving text rather than simply the word of God as revealed in its entirety to Muhammad (Warraq, 2002, p. 109). He is thrilled, “So many Muslims have this belief that everything between the two covers of the Qur’an is just God’s unaltered word. They like to quote the textual work that shows that the Bible has a history and did not fall straight out of the sky, but until now the Qur’an has been out of discussion. The only way to break through this wall is to prove that the Qur’an has a history too. The Sana’a’s fragments will help us to do this.”

Puin even concluded (cited Taher, 2000), “It is not one single work that has survived unchanged through the centuries. It may include stories that were written before the prophet Mohammed began his ministry and which have subsequently been rewritten“.

During their research, as Puin (Lester, 1999) recalls, “They [Yemeni authorities] wanted to keep this thing low profile, as we do too, although for different reasons. They don’t want attention drawn to the fact that there are Germans and others working on the Qur’ans. They don’t want it made public that there is work being done at all, since the Muslim position is that everything that needs to be said about the Qur’an’s history was said a thousand years ago.”

In fact, Puin and his colleague Bothmer knew for sometime during their study that Qur’an is an evolving text but they wisely understood the possible implications of their findings and kept quiet. If Yemeni authorities come to know about this discovery, they may even refuse them further access. This is actually what Puin called ‘different reasons‘. So both sides kept quiet, and those two scholars carried on their research unabated.

Puin’s findings also confirm Wansbrough’s assumption on Qur’anic text. During the seventies Wansbrough concluded that Qur’an evolved only gradually in the seventh and eighth centuries after a long period of oral transmissions and different sects used to argue furiously with each other on the genuineness of the revelations. The reason that no Islamic source material from the very beginning of Islam never survived is because it never existed. In fact Puin admitted ‘rereading Wansbrough‘ during the course of analyzing the Yemeni fragments (Warraq, 2002. p. 122).

Puin’s other radical theory is that pre-Islamic sources have entered the Qur’an. He argues that two tribes it mentions, As-Sahab-ar-Rass (Companions of the Well) and the As- Sahab-al-Aiqa (Companions of the Thorny Bushes) are not part of the Arab tradition, and the people of Muhammad’s time certainly did not know about them. He also disagrees that Qur’an was written in the purest Arabic. The very word Qur’an itself is of foreign origin. Contrary to popular Muslim belief, the meaning of “Qur’an” is not recitation. It is actually derived from an Aramaic word, ‘Qariyun’, meaning a lectionary of scripture portions appointed to be read at divine service. Qur’an contains most of the biblical stories but in a shorter form and is “a summary of the Bible to be read in service”.

Bothmer has painstakingly finished taking more than thirty-five thousand microfilm pictures of the fragments by 1997 and brought the pictures back to Germany (Warraq, 2002. p. 109). It means now Bothmer, Puin and other scholars will finally have a chance to scrutinize the texts and to publish their findings freely.

Puin is interested to write a book on this in the future, but already wrote several short essays on their findings in various science magazines, where he pointed out several aberrations between the ancient Qur’an and the present standard one (cited Warraq, 2002. p. 739- 44). In refuting the sacredness of Qur’an, Puin wrote, “My idea is that the Qur’an is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even at the time of Muhammad. Many of them may even be a hundred years older than Islam itself. The Qur’an claims for itself that it is ‘mubeen’, or clear. But [contrary to popular belief] if you look at it, you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply does not make sense…the fact is that a fifth of the Qur’anic text is just incomprehensible. If the Qur’an is not comprehensible, if it can’t even be understood in Arabic, then it’s not translatable into any language. That is why Muslims are afraid. Since the Qur’an claims repeatedly to be clear but is not-there is an obvious and serious contradiction. Something else must be going on“.

The extraordinary discovery of Puin had fascinated Andrew Rippin, a Professor of religious studies and a leading expert on Qur’anic studies. Rippin (cited Warraq, 2002. p.110) concluded, “The impact of the Yemeni manuscripts is still to be felt. Their variant readings and verse orders are all very significant. Everybody agrees on that. These manuscripts say that the early history of Qur’anic text is much more of an open question than many have suspected. The text was less stable and therefore had less authority, than has always been claimed”.

Rippin’s observation was superb. During the period of early Caliphs, Islam grew as political movement and not as a religious movement. A book like Qur’an was required to keep the Muslims in unity. Qur’an is just like a ’status symbol’ of Islam, without which Islam would have died during the time of Muhammad only. Qur’an is purely manmade. Some sort of Divinity was attached to the Qur’an so that it can command some respect because it could not stand on its own worth. This way, in acknowledging the claims of the Qur’an as the direct utterance of the Divinity, the early manipulators had blocked all the criticism, which can otherwise expose it. Qur’an itself prohibits criticism in the verses 5:101 and 5:102. We do not know when religious blindness crept in, but undoubtedly, the early Muslims after Muhammad were more liberal than the present generation we are seeing today. The authenticity of many verses had been called into question by the early Muslims themselves. Many Kharijites, who were followers of Ali in the early history of Islam, found the Sura recounting the story of Joseph offensive, an erotic tale that cannot belong to the Qur’an (cited Warraq, 1998. p.17).

Warraq (1998, p. 14) has the same view as Rippin, “Muslim scholars of the early years of Islam were far more flexible in their position, realizing that parts of the Qur’an was lost, perverted and that there were many thousand variants which made it impossible to talk of ‘the’ Qur’an“.

There is another proof that Qur’anic messages were distorted in the early days of Islam and nothing like ‘The‘ Qur’an does exist any more. Inscriptions of several Qur’anic verses are decorated on the Dome of Rock of Jerusalem, which is most probably the first Islamic monument meant to be a major artistic achievement, built in 691 CE (Whelan, 1998, pp 1-14). These inscriptions significantly differ from the present standard text (Warraq, 2000, p. 34).

Mingana (cited Warraq, 1998. p.80) lamented, “The most important question in the study of the Qur’an is its unchallengeable authority“. This is the only reason; critical investigation of the text of the Qur’an is a study which is still in its immaturity. As Rippin (1991, p. ix) lamented, “I have often encountered individuals who come to the study of Islam with a background in the historical study of the Hebrew Bible or early Christianity, and who express surprise at the lack of critical thought that appears in introductory textbooks of Islam. The notion that ‘Islam is born in the clear light of history’ still seems to be assumed by a great many writers of such texts.’

Cook and Crone (1977, p. 18) concluded, “[The Qur’an] strikingly lacking in overall structure, frequently obscure and inconsequential in both language and content perfunctory in its liking of disparate materials and given to the repetition of whole passages in variant versions. On this basis, it can be argued that the book is the product of a belated and imperfect editing of materials from a plurality of traditions.” Crone (cited Warraq, 1998, p. 33) elsewhere wrote,The Qur’an has generated masses of spurious information“.

But in case of Bible, it is different, as Rodhinson (1980, p. viii) observed, “[For Bible] the scientific attitude begins with the decision to accept something as fact only if the source has been proved reliable“. Muslims wrongly interpret the honesty Christians display about some variant readings of the Bible as weakness (Ali & Spencer; 2003. p. 76-9). Christians, like Hindus, want to see their Holy book through scientific and historical point of view. When old Biblical manuscripts, parchments or ancient Hindu manuscripts are discovered, Christian and Hindu scholars almost climb over each other’s shoulder to gain an early access to them. Such findings cause great excitement to them. But sadly, no such excitement exists in Islam. Christians and Hindus are eager to see more and more light shed on the earliest manuscripts of their scriptures, while Muslims resist, often with strong determination. The contrast is really striking. While both Hindu and Christian faiths are strongly backed up by archeological and historical evidence; so far neither any archeological exploration was allowed in Mecca and Medina, nor there is any prospect in the future (Peters, 1986. p. 72-4).

Muslim criticism of Qur’an is very rare and almost nonexistent as Sina (2008, p. 6) lamented, “Muslims are genuinely incapable of questioning Islam“. Recently the ex-Muslim websites are doing some remarkable work on this. Ultimately, these enlightened people will successfully free their Muslim brothers and sisters from the Islamic prison. Otherwise whatever criticism is done on Qur’an are all by the Christian scholars. But Muslims should not take the Christian criticism as a mark of religious opposition. Christian scholars have done much more criticism of their own religion than Islam (Sproul & Saleeb, 2003. p. 17; Spencer, 2007, p. 1).

But once the Sana’a findings are published in details, Islam will not be the same as it was for fourteen centuries. Islam is definitely going to take a strange position. Many Muslims will cast doubt on Qur’anic sacredness and the very ‘romantic’ concept of the Qur’an will gradually disappear and then a very interesting development can be observed. The first question which will appear in their mind is – which version is superior. But then, it is not possible to choose a Qur’an and discard the other by preference. Because the Muslim belief also confirms that who denies a single verse of the Qur’an denies the entire revelation. This is a logical impossibility and since scientific research had already spoken out the truth; many Muslims will seek a way out of this nonsense and will try to free themselves from the tyrannical oppression of living in a false religion.

While discussing Muslim’s apathy to science, reason and natural law, Jaki (cited Spencer, 2002, p. 127) wrote, “What is occurring in the Muslim world today is a confrontation, not between God and devil… but between a very specific God and science which is a very specific antagonist of that God, the Allah of the Qur’an, in whom the will wholly dominates the intellect“. The Sana’a discovery will just add fuel to the fire. Today the Muslim world is beset with frustration. Islam is supposed to be the final revelation and Muslims are supposed to be the “Best of Mankind”, but the reality is just opposite. Muslim nations are poorest in the world (Ohmyrus, 2006, p. 128). A time will come when the religious authorities will be asked by the common Muslims to refute the critics by logic, science and reason, not by the brutal force or Fatwa. As Parvez Manzoor wrote, “Sooner or later [we Muslims] will have to approach the Qur’an from methodological assumptions and parameters that are radically at odds with the ones consecrated by our tradition” (Warraq, 2002, p. 123)

But the Sana’a manuscripts will also provoke another question. If Qur’an is a lie, how the lie survived for so many centuries? The reason is that the Divinity attached to Qur’an is not ‘A Small Lie’, but ‘The Big Lie’. The big lies are very powerful, and it always has a psychological effect on the listeners. The bigger the lie, the more believable it is. Adolf Hitler wrote in Mein Kamph (1925), “The broad mass of a Nation will fall victim to a big lie than to a small one.” Big lies are extraordinarily convincible because it offsets the scale of the listener’s commonsense, as Sina (2008, p. 179) explained, an ordinary person does not dare to tell a big lie thinking that it would not be believed and he would be ridiculed. Since there is no one who had never told a lie in his life, small lies are often detectable sooner or later. But the big lies are so strange that it often startle the listener. When the lie is gigantic, the average person is left to wonder how anyone can have the courage, the impudence to say such a thing.

Big lies always work wonder in politics. As George Orwell (cites Sina, 2008, p. 179) said, “Political language … is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable and give an appearance of solidity to pure wind“. Today when the divinity of Qur’an is scattered by the Sana’a manuscripts, the spiritual nature of Islam is also exposed. Islam is nothing but a pure Arab political movement. The Divinity was attached to Qur’an, when Arabs started conquering the surrounding nations and Islam was imposed on them by force. Arabs not only imposed Islam on others but also imposed this irrational belief of Qur’anic divinity to the minds of their victims, so that once Arabs are gone, the conquered people cannot come out from this mental enslavement and return back to their original faith. It is a rare political skill. Many companions of Muhammad clearly knew that Qur’an was a fake, but they remained with their prophet to share the booty and to enjoy the women. We all know, after Muhammad’s death, several Arab tribes returned back to their original belief and idolatry flourished.

With much shock to the Muslims; modern study on Psychology had spoken out the truth that Muhammad was an imposter, a madman who was suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Narcissists are such self-absorbed persons who are pathological liars. It means, either they are unaware of their lies or feel completely justified and at easy in lying to others. Their mental condition is such that they have that rare capability to believe their own lies (Vaknin, 1999, p. 24).

And, yes, Adolf Hitler, who knew of the power of Big lie and misguided millions of Germans, is also recognized as a Narcissist. Today Hitler is the most hatred historical figure in Germany. Like a mathematical certainty Muhammad will earn the same fate. But we really do not know, how many million people will die before we can put Muhammad in dustbin with his Allah, Qur’an and Islam altogether. For Hitler it was National Socialism (another name of Nazism) and for Muhammad it was Islam, but deep down, both were two sides of same coin – a successful manipulator.

Sina (2008, p. iv, 260) commented, “Islam is like a house of cards, sustained by lies. All it takes to demolish is to challenge one of those lies holding it together. It is a tall building, erected on quicksand; once you expose its foundation, the sand will wash away and this mighty edifice will fall under its own weight” and again, “Islam stands on a very shaky ground. It rests on nothing but lies. All we have to do to demolish it is to expose those lies and this gigantic edifice of terror and deception will collapse.”

Let’s see, once the sacred aura of Qur’an is gone, what other lies are exposed.

First; if there are two or more versions of Qur’an, then there must be equal number of Allahs. So if only two Qur’ans are authentic, is Islam any longer monotheism? How to decide, which Allah gave which Qur’an? If there is only one Allah, then which Qur’an is authentic?

Second; if we still believe that one Qur’an is authentic, then how Allah allowed the others to survive?

Third; is it true anymore that Qur’an (10.64) says Allah’s words do not change – this is indeed the mighty achievement? If yes, what more than one Quran is doing now? If not, how this false revelation is recorded in Qur’an? Did Satan put it?

Final; Bukhari (4.52.233) recorded “Unbelievers will never understand our signs and revelations.” But we see, for understanding the Sana’a Qur’an, the Yemeni authorities invited German scholars because there was no one in Yemen capable of working on this rich find.

No wonder Sina (2008) concluded, “No matter how you look at Islam it turns out to be a foolish religion.”

Muslims have sold their soul to Muhammad, but can they logically clear the above doubts? The Sana’a episode had put them in such an awkward position, that even circular reasoning or absurd logic will not help. Is not it time for prudent Muslims to give a second thought to their cherished faith? Instead of trying hard to reason out the above doubts, is not it more sensible to agree that a billion plus Muslims had been fooled by a vulgar imposter named Prophet Muhammad? Is not it time for Muslims to care for what is true? As poet Thomas Gray (cited Sagan, 1997, p. 12) wrote, “… where ignorance is bliss, “Tis [It is] folly to be wise“.

To protect the Qur’an from more humiliation, Yemeni authorities already debarred Puin and Bothmer from further examination of those manuscripts. In fact, now they do not allow anyone to see those manuscripts anymore except some very carefully selected non-Qur’anic parchments, which are at display at the ground floor of Dar al-Makhtutat Library. But this is not going to help. The bird is already out of the cage and it is useless closing the door now. More than thirty-five thousand microfilms are out of Yemen before the authorities came to know and already several duplicates are made. The present author is sure that at this very moment, in some undisclosed location in Germany, a group of experts are endlessly working on the microfilms and Puin is burning enough midnight oil to complete his book, which, once published, will hammer another nail in the coffin of Islam. Islam is in real danger now.

Obviously, by realizing the Divine downfall within sight, many Muslims are disturbed and offended. The fundamentalists will not accept Puin’s and Bothmer’s work as having been done with academic objectivity, but see it as a deliberate attack on the integrity of the Qu’ranic text (Taher, 2000). Naturally, those two German scholars will be at forefront of their rage. Puin fears a violent backlash from orthodox Muslims because of his “blasphemous” theory, which he says, he cannot take lightly. By remembering the Salman Rushdie affair he wrote, “My conclusions have sparked angry reactions from orthodox Muslims. They’ve said I’m not really the scholar to make any remarks on these manuscripts“. If Puin’s views are taken up and trumpeted in the media, and if there are not many Muslims being rational about it, then all hell may break loose. There will be some hostile response and riots causing much death and destruction, may be another fatwa from Khomeini and surely some hollow threats from our camera-loving Bin Laden, and his ideological brothers. But can they stop the truth from spreading?

UNESCO has shown genuine interest in the Sana’a manuscripts ever since the Memory of the World programme is started.  In 1995, the Organization also produced a CD-ROM in Arabic, English and French illustrating the history of the collection containing both Qur’anic and non-Qur’ani material. The CD-ROM offers 651 images of 302 Qur’anic fragments, indexed by script, frames, etc, a general introduction to the Yemenite manuscripts collections and a brief description on the evolution of Arabic calligraphy (Abid, 1997).

Ursula Dreibholz, a preservation expert who worked on the Sana’a project for eight years as the chief conservator is much frustrated by seeing the lack of concern of Yemeni authorities to protect those manuscripts by using modern technology (1983, pp. 30-8). Neither the security devices are correct, nor is adequate attention being given to the manuscripts to avoid further deterioration (1996, pp 131-45). In fact, Dreibholz (1999, pp 21-5) said that it was her greatest concern to create a safe and reliable permanent storage system for the restored fragments. Also, there is poor storage hardly any protection from insects and water. Most importantly, the real problem is the lack of a fire prevention or detection system, keeping in mind the truly catastrophic fires that have destroyed important libraries and artworks around the world throughout history. The Yemeni authorities said neither they have money nor means to install such fire protection systems. She does not understand the genuine reason behind the apathy of Yemeni authorities.

Here Muslim fundamentalists can see a silver lining in the cloud. No one knows when a devastating fire will break out ‘accidentally’ and destroy all the Qur’anic manuscripts, which are really causing such heartburn to them. After all, for saving Islam, Qur’an must be saved for which Muslims will go any length. If necessary they will burn the Qur’an to save it from logical analysis. Their devotion to stupidity is really that high. Probably, Yemeni authority’s unwillingness to install such fire protection systems is an initial preparation for such an act in the future. Never underestimate the destructive capability of the brainless bigots.



  1. Abid, Abdelaziz (1997); “Memory of the World”: Preserving Our Documentary Heritage. Museum International, Vol. 49, No. 1, January 1997 issue. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
  1. Dreibholz, Ursula (1983); A treasure of early Islamic manuscripts on parchment. Significance of the find and its conservation treatment. AIC Preprints of papers presented at the 11th annual meeting in Baltimore, Maryland, 25-29 May 1983. Washington, DC.
  1. Dreibholz, Ursula (1996); The Treatment of Early Islamic Manuscript Fragments on Parchment in The Conservation and Preservation of Islamic Manuscripts, Al-Furqan Islamic Heritage Foundation, London
  1. Dreibholz, Ursula (1999); Preserving a treasure: the Sana’a manuscripts. Museum International. Islamic collections. Vol. LI, No. 3, July 1999 issue. Blackwell Publishers. Oxford.
  1. Whelan, Estelle (1998); Forgotten Witness: Evidence for the Early Codification of the Qur’an. Published in The Journal of America Oriental Society. January to March Issue, 1998. University of Michigan. USA.


  1. Ali, Daniel & Spencer, Robert (2003); Inside Islam: A guide for Catholics. Ascension Press. Pennsylvania.
  1. Caner E. M; Caner E.F (2002); Unveiling Islam. Kregel Publications. Grand Rapids. U.S.A
  1. Cook, Michael; Crone, Patricia (1977); Hagarism: The making of the Islamic world. Cambridge.
  1. (Dr) Vaknin, Sam (1999); Malignant Self Love: Narcissism Revisited. Narcissus Publications, Skopje. Czech Republic.
  1. (Ed.) Warraq, Ibn (1998); The origins of the Koran: Classic Essays on Islam’s holy book. Prometheus Books. NY.
  1. (Ed.) Warraq, Ibn (2000); The Quest for Historical Muhammad. Prometheus books. NY.
  1. (Ed.) Warraq, Ibn (2002); What the Koran really says – Language, Text and Commentary. Prometheus books. NY.
  1. Guillaume, Alfred (1978); Islam. Harmondsworth.
  1. Mein Kampf; a 1939 English translation by Houghton Mifflin and edited of verbosity. Reynal & Hitchcock
  1. Ohmyrus (2006); The Left and Islam: Tweedledum and Tweedledee in Beyond Jihad: Critical voices from the inside by Shienbaum, Kim and Hasan, Jamal. Academia Press, LLC, Bethesda.
  1. Peters, F.E (1986); Jerusalem and Mecca: The topology of the Holy City in the near east. NY.
  1. Rippin, Andrew (1991): Muslims: their religious beliefs and practices. London.
  1. Rodhinson, Maxime (1980); Muhammad (Original in French, translated to English by Anne Carter). The New Press. NY
  1. Rodhinson, Maxime (1981); A Critical Survey of Modern Studies on Muhammad in Studies on Islam ed. M. Swartz. Oxford University Press, USA
  1. Sagan, Karl (1997); The Demon-Haunted World. Science as a Candle in the Dark. Ballantine Books. The Random House Publishing group. NY.
  1. Sina, Ali (2008); Understanding Muhammad, A Psychobiography.
  1. Spencer, Robert (2002); Islam Unveiled: Disturbing questions about the world’s fastest growing faith. Encounter Books. San Francisco.
  1. Spencer, Robert (2007); Religion of Peace? Why Christianity is and Islam isn’t. Regnery Publishing, Inc. Washington DC.
  1. Sproul R. C & Saleeb, Abdul (2003); The dark side of Islam. Crossway Books (a division of Good News Publishers). Wheaton. Illinois.

Internet Sources:

  1. Taher, Abul (2000): Querying the Koran. The Guardian. Guardian News and Media Limited. Published on 8th August, 2000. URL:,4273,4048586,00.html (Last accessed 3rd June / 2009)
  1. Sina, Ali (2008): Probing Islam. An internet based debate between J. A Ghamidi, K. Zaheer and Ali Sina, FFI. URL: (Last accessed 7th February / 2008).
  1. Lester, Toby (1999); What Is the Koran? Atlantic Monthly January 1999 issue. URL: (Last accessed 3rd June / 2009).
  1. Wikipedia (2009); Gerd R. Puin, URL:

(Last accessed 3rd June / 2009).

Author can be contacted at

Posted in Islam | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

The Good Holocaust Denial

Posted by Mats on 11/05/2009

by sheikyermami on May 11, 2009

laskarjihad                                            Jihad then and now:

“We have double standards to maintain”- Bill Warner recognizes  the Arab holocaust on the Jews:

The German Holocaust created Israel and the modern Jew. Although not all Jews agree on the truth of the Torah, all Jews agree on the German Holocaust. To deny the truth of the Holocaust is a crime in Germany. German Holocaust denial will even get the ire of the cultural Jew who never crosses the threshold of the synagogue.

Notice that the term German Holocaust is used, not Holocaust, because there is a much earlier Holocaust that occurred under Mohammed in Arabia. But as we will see, the German Holocaust and its basis in a totalitarian ideology can be criticized, while the political ideology of Islam is beyond the pale of critical thought. We may savage the Nazi and his ideology, but the Muslim and his ideology of political Islam has to be respected with the silence of deliberate ignorance-denial and justification.

Since the German Holocaust is the standard of suffering for modern Judaism, it is interesting to use it as a measurement of the Arabian Holocaust.


There are two different Korans-an early one written in Mecca and a later one written in Medina. In Mecca, Mohammed claimed to get his Koran from Gabriel, a Jewish angel and portrayed himself in the line of Jewish prophets. Indeed, that was his proof of being a prophet; he was just like the Jews.

When Mohammed arrived in Medina, which was half Jewish, the Jews informed him that he was not a prophet of theirs. The Koran changed its attitude, and Jews became the object of hatred. Indeed, as a measurement of that hatred, 10.6% of the Koran written in Medina is about Jew hatred. Using the concept of the German Holocaust as the reference, it should be noted that 6.8% of Mein Kampf is about Jew hatred. Conclusion: the Koran written in Medina is more filled with Jew hatred than Mein Kampf. Here is one of the more egregious verses:


Koran 2:65 We [Allah] said to them [the Jews], “You will be transformed into despised apes.” So We used them as a warning to their people and to the following generations, as well as a lesson for the Allah-fearing.

But the Koran is only 16% of the sacred texts of Islam. The Sunna of Mohammed is found in the Hadith (his traditions) and the Sira (his biography). In the Sira, 5.3% of the Medinan text relates to the destruction of the Jews-assassinations, executions, rapes, torture and exile. Then there are many other pages that are verbal violence against the Jews. If you add the verbal violence to the physical violence, the Medinan Sira is 8.6% Jew hatred. Mein Kampf is 6.8% Jew hatred. Conclusion: the Sira (Mohammed’s biography) contains a greater proportion of Jew hatred than Mein Kampf.

When we come to the Hadith, we do not have such high percentages of text related to Jew hatred; but here are two examples:

Muslim Book 042, Number 7135 Mohammed: “A tribe of Jews disappeared. I do not know what became of them, but I think they mutated and became rats. Have you noticed that a rat won’t drink camel’s milk, but it will drink goat’s milk?”

Muslim Book 041, Number 6985: Mohammed: The last hour will not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews. The Muslims would kill them, until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree. The stone or a tree would say: Muslim, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him. The tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

What was the result of all of this hatred? Mohammed killed, enslaved, tortured, exiled, robbed and raped all of the Jews of Medina and then went a hundred miles away and attacked and destroyed the Jews of Khaybar. After he had taken their wealth, tortured the Jewish leader to death, and laid out the jihadic rules of rape for women, he made the Jews of Khaybar a new type of half-human-the dhimmi. The Jews of Khaybar became semi-slaves of Islam. They could keep their Jewish culture in the home and synagogue, but they had to pay a 50% tax and live under Islamic rule without civil rights. Finally, when Mohammed lay on his deathbed, he exiled all Jews and Christians from Arabia. There are Jews still in Germany today, but Arabia is Judenrein and has been for 1400 years.

And what do Jews, Jewish leaders and Jewish organizations say about the Arabian Holocaust? They deny it absolutely and categorically. They even deny that the subject of the Arabian Holocaust even exists.

Examine the case of the survival of Israel. Since so many liberal Jews deny the existence of the Arabian Holocaust and the Islamic Jew doctrine, they are incapable of answering the question: Who is the enemy of Israel? Jews cannot connect the dots from Mumbai to Israel and how Kashmir and Israel are the same struggle.

The Jews and Israel are losing the propaganda war. Modern wars are won in the propaganda arena, not with guns and bombs. It is the media that determines who is the victor, not the dead body counts. This started in Vietnam and has been true ever since.

Islam knows how to fight a propaganda war. The Holocaust has become the propaganda tool of victory in the hands of Islam. Islam mocks the Holocaust and turns it on Israel, saying that Israel is the Nazi state.

The Muslims of Gaza know that their war is an extension of the Arabian Holocaust and refer to it in their propaganda. Mohammed’s destruction of the Jews is their ideal and goal. They see Israel as Khaybar. They know that one day the Jews of Israel will be their dhimmi servants again and so they chant: Khaybar, Khaybar. Oh, you Jews! The army of Mohammed is here for you.

Since Jews refuse to recognize their enemy, Islam, they can never defeat them. When given the choice of acknowledging the Arabian Holocaust (and the Jew hatred doctrine) and saving Israel, far too many Jews choose denial. Jewish/Israeli propaganda is weak and only operates in the defensive mode. They do not have an offensive propaganda campaign, because they do not have a doctrine to base it on, nor are they clear on who the real enemy is.

The Islamic propaganda war will destroy Israel’s allies in Europe and the US. When American support of Israel goes, there goes Israel.

There is a second problem created by the Jewish denial of the Arabian Holocaust. Jews are some of America’s best intellectuals and most are major apologists (dhimmis) for Islam. The ACLU is CAIR’s (Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Hamas front) best friend. Rabbis love to bring in the Somali warlord immigrant or the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood member to the synagogue to tell the Jews about the real Islam. So too many Jewish intellectuals bring harm both to Israel and America because of their deliberate ignorance about both the doctrine and history of political Islam.

Jews cry the slogan “Never again” for Christian Europe, but they have adopted “Never happened” for Arabs and Islam.

Well, we have criticized the Jewish response to Islam. Now let’s turn our attention to the Christians. Same song, second verse, could be better, but only gets worse. When it comes to being a dhimmi apologist for Islam, the average Christian does not need lessons from the Jews. They, too, deny the Arabian Holocaust.

However, Christians don’t specialize in Arabian Holocaust denial; Christians have their plates full with the denial of the destruction of ancient Christianity in Iraq, Egypt, Turkey, Lebanon, Syria and North Africa. And just like the Jews, they not only deny the truth of Christian annihilation, but they also deny that such a history even exists. The book of Revelation mentions the Seven Churches of Asia (Asia Minor, Anatolia, modern Turkey). I have never met a Christian who could explain what happened to the Seven Churches, or even acknowledged the existence of the annihilation. 

Christians deny the brutal daily persecution of their brethren throughout Africa and the Middle East today, just as they deny the Islamic doctrine of annihilation of Christians in Mohammed’s time and in 1400 years of past history.

Again, we have a parallel between the Christian and the Jew. The majority of Christians cannot name the enemy of Christianity and Jews cannot identify the enemy of Judaism and Israel.

The average Christian minister seems to be as incapable as a rabbi of being brave enough to read Islamic doctrine or history. Since all of the textual doctrine of Islam-Koran, Sira (Mohammed’s biography) and Hadith (his traditions)-has been made easy to read, it is not the intellectual challenge but fear that prevents them from seeking knowledge. So in place of knowledge through solid scholarship, Christians have some “good” Muslim explain about Islam and tell them about how they are all brothers who worship the same god. Hardly.

If it is so bad to deny the German Holocaust, why is it so good to deny the Arabian Holocaust and the Islamic Annihilation of Christianity? Why can we condemn the Nazis, but not the Muslim jihadists?

Germans killing Jews is evil. But Mohammed killing Jews and Christians is-who knows, who cares, why bother?

Posted in Islam, Religion | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Muslim: The Jews “are enemies not because they occupied Palestine

Posted by Mats on 23/03/2009

March 6, 2009

Egyptian cleric: The Jews “are enemies not because they occupied Palestine. They would have been enemies even if they did not occupy a thing.”

They keep telling us that it isn’t about “stolen land,” and that land concessions and even the creation of a Palestinian state will not end the conflict. And we keep refusing to believe it.

“Egyptian Cleric Muhammad Hussein Ya’qoub: The Jews Are the Enemies of Muslims Regardless of the Occupation of Palestine,” from MEMRI TV, January 17 (just posted), with thanks to Sr. Soph:

Following are excerpts from a speech delivered by Egyptian cleric Muhammad Hussein Ya’qoub, which aired on Al-Rahma TV on January 17, 2009.Muhammad Hussein Ya’qoub: If the Jews left Palestine to us, would we start loving them? Of course not. We will never love them. Absolutely not. The Jews are infidels – not because I say so, and not because they are killing Muslims, but because Allah said: “The Jews say that Uzair is the son of Allah, and the Christians say that Christ is the son of Allah. These are the words from their mouths. They imitate the sayings of the disbelievers before. May Allah fight them. How deluded they are.” It is Allah who said that they are infidels.


That’s Qur’an 9:30.

Your belief regarding the Jews should be, first, that they are infidels, and second, that they are enemies. They are enemies not because they occupied Palestine. They would have been enemies even if they did not occupy a thing. Allah said: “You shall find the strongest men in enmity to the disbelievers [sic] to be the Jews and the polytheists.”

Qur’an 5:82.

Third, you must believe that the Jews will never stop fighting and killing us. They [fight] not for the sake of land and security, as they claim, but for the sake of their religion: “And they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back you’re your religion, if they can.”

Qur’an 2:217.

This is it. We must believe that our fighting with the Jews is eternal, and it will not end until the final battle – and this is the fourth point. You must believe that we will fight, defeat, and annihilate them, until not a single Jew remains on the face of the Earth.It is not me who says so. The Prophet said: “Judgment Day will not come until you fight the Jews and kill them. The Jews will hide behind stones and trees, and the stones and tree will call: Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him – except for the Gharqad tree, which is the tree of the Jews.” I have heard that they are planting many of these trees now. […]


That Hadith can be found at Sahih Muslim 6985.

As for you Jews – the curse of Allah upon you. The curse of Allah upon you, whose ancestors were apes and pigs.

That’s Qur’an 2:62-65; 5:59-60; and 7:166.

You Jews have sown hatred in our hearts, and we have bequeathed it to our children and grandchildren. You will not survive as long as a single one of us remains.[…]

Oh Jews, may the curse of Allah be upon you. Oh Jews… Oh Allah, bring Your wrath, punishment, and torment down upon them. Allah, we pray that you transform them again, and make the Muslims rejoice again in seeing them as apes and pigs. You pigs of the earth! You pigs of the earth! You kill the Muslims with that cold pig [blood] of yours.


And now the learned analysts will turn to one another and repeat once again that the Israeli/Palestinian conflict has nothing to do with theology, nothing to do with Islam.

Posted by Robert at March 6, 2009 5:53 PM

Posted in Islam | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

%d bloggers like this: