text:
What happens when you lose sight of an ancient civilization? What happens when the history of an entire era is hijacked? What happens when you take away the legacy of a nation? What happens when you violate the sanctity of a human being; of all mankind? What happens when all this comes to pass? Is the truth irrevocably lost? Or does it hide from sight, only to return after a while, as the Dwellers of the Cave returned to the City? And can the people of the City suffer the return of the Cave Dwellers? Or will darkness endure in the City? Will the Nile Valley accept the return of the Egyptian civilization? Or will Miṣr remain in the City? Will the land of Yemen accept the return of Ibraheem's ancestors? Or will their memory be forever imprisoned in Iraq? Can the Sarawāt Mountains of forgotten Arabia suffer the return of the Patriarch and his descendants Isḥāq and Ya'qūb? Or will their legacy be held hostage indefinitely in the wilderness of the Levant? Will Yūsuf and Mūsa return to their homeland on the green slopes of Ḥimyar? Or are they doomed to tarry forever in the desert of rabbinical lies? Will ancient Ṣan'ā' ever sing its Psalms again, heralding the return of its sons, Dāwūd and Sulaymān? Or will their
memory be eternally lost in Palestine and the passages of the Orientalist translations of the Old Testament?
Is there anyone on this Earth who will listen to the call of the Sarawāt Mountains and pave the
way for the truth to return to the City? And will the people of the City welcome the return of the truth?
Spelling and Transliteration
The Invention of a National Identity
The London Conference and Establishment of the "Buffer State"
Marketing the Lie
The Khazarian Conspiracy
The "Hebrew" Deception
"Hebrew" - A Name, or a Description?
CHAPTER I: Abraham's Journey: Separating the Truth from the Myth
Ibraheem's Original Homeland
The Location of the "Blessed Land" - Religious Confusion
The Jealous Wife
Trip to Egypt?
CHAPTER II: Al-Hamadāni's Testimony
Coincidences (1-20): Beer-Sheba
Coincidences (21-31): Beth-El
CHAPTER III: Peoples, Tribes and Trees
Who were the Biblical Canaanites?
Egypt vs. Msrim
The People of Lot
The Tribe of 'Ād
The Tribe of Thamūd
Trees and Roots: The Great Scandal
This book is not the work of one person, nor can any single person lay claim to its contents. It is a compilation of many works; an assemblage of book passages, sayings, quotes, interviews, and articles most of which have been translated from Arabic to English for your convenience, and compiled into one volume. It is not to be published, for those responsible for its compilation have no legal right to publish it in any way, shape or form; nor do they seek any material gain from it. It has been made available for free and is for you, dear knowledge-seeker, to read in the privacy of your own home, and to share with your friends or loved ones as you see fit.
The message of this book is directed first and foremost to those who call themselves "Muslims", especially those among them who can read and understand Arabic, as they have the utmost obligation and responsibility towards their non-Arab brothers and sisters in the faith.
This is because only those who can speak and read the original language of the Qur'ān are qualified to assess the credibility of the Arabic sources used as references, and to judge the
accuracy of the translation of Qur'ānic passages to English. In no way does this imply that
Christians or Jews - especially those who are not content with the beliefs they have inherited from their parents or communities, and who feel an urge to search for the truth - cannot benefit from its message. The book is mainly concerned with history, geography and
archeology, and most of the information contained within it is of special relevance to the
followers of the other "Abrahamic" faiths as well.
We dedicate this endeavor to all of humanity. May it contribute to our awakening.
Compiled by:
The Badr Society for Cultural Research
The following is a spelling and transliteration guide, to help non-speakers of Arabic grasp the actual pronunciation of certain Arabic letters.
a = أ (short alif ) when it comes at the beginning of a word. Examples: amr )رمأ(, aseer )ريسأ(, alam )ملأ(. _________
' = أ ( short alif ) when it comes in the middle or the end of a word. Examples: ma'kal )لكأم(, ma'wa )ىوأم(, Saba' )أبس(, naba' )أبن(.
OR, ( hamzah ). Examples: jā' )ءاج(, mā' _________
)ءام(, Qur' ān
ā = (long alif ). Examples: asmā' )ءامسأ(, anwār )راونأ(, aqlām )ملاقأ(. _________
th = ث
(thā' ). Examples: Yathrib )برثي(, thawāb )باوث(, thaman )نمث(.
dh = ذ
(dhāl ). Examples: dhahab )بهذ(, ādhān )ناذآ(, dhakar )ركذ(.
ḥ = ح
(ḥā' ). Examples: ḥamal )لمح(, ḥoot )توح(, Ḥimyar )ريَمحِ (.
ṣ = ص (ṣād ). Examples: Ṣāleh )حلاص(, ṣiyām )مايص(, aṣnām )مانصأ(. _________
ḍ = ض (ḍād ). Examples: Ramaḍān )ناضمر(, ḍalāl )للاض(, ghaḍab )بضغ(. _________
ṭ =
(ṭā' ). Examples: ṭūr )روط(, bāṭil )لطاب(, ṭāreq )قراط(.
ẓ = ظ (ẓā' ). Examples: ẓaheera
)ةريهظ(, ẓalām )ملاظ(, shawāẓ )ظاوش(.
' = ع ('ayn ). Examples: 'iqāb )باقع(, a'rāb )بارعأ(, Far'awn )نوعرف(. _________
gh = غ (ghayn ). Examples: ghayth __________
)روفغ(, raghd
q = ق
(qāf ).
Examples: qitāl
)لاتق(, qalam )ملق(, Quraysh
h = ـه
(hā ).
Examples: Hūd
)دوه(, hadiyy )ّيده (, wahn )نهو(.
Note: Aside from proper nouns (the names of prophets or geographical locations), certain terms that appear in the Arabic text of the Qur' ān have been left un-translated for the time being, as we have yet to find accurate substitutes for them in English. Consequently, those terms have been left as they are, and transliterated for the convenience of non-speakers of Arabic.
The events described in the Old Testament did not take place in ancient Palestine. They took place in the Sarāt Country of South-West Arabia; the region of highlands and mountains bordering the Red Sea coast and extending from the southern border of the 'Aseer province of Saudi Arabia, all the way down to the coast of 'Ādan in Yemen. Hence, the Children of Israel were an ancient Arabian tribe of the legendary Qaḥtān branch (the Old Testament "Joktan"); and the creeds of both Judaism and the Naṣrāniyya (the source of Pauline Christianity) were born among them, then spread from their original homeland of Arabia to other regions of the ancient world, carried on the wings of the so-called "Semitic" migrations.
It is here, at the very start of this intricate part of our quest, where we must take a pre-emptive stance against the usual baseless and slanderous accusations that are thrown our way, no sooner than we open our mouths to declare the shattering truth regarding the geography of the prophets:
The claim that we are in league with the imperialist West, and encouraging the Zionists to annex and occupy the southern part of Arabia. In fact, those who make this claim are not only unknowingly marketing the baseless ideology of the "Promised Land" - regardless of where that land may be - but are also confusing two very distinct concepts: Israelite and Jew. This often overlooked fact leads us to the following question: Why is Judaism defined today as being a race?
This question keeps posing itself day after day in our modern age, and will probably continue to do so as long as the contradiction persists between sound logic and instinctive truth on the one hand and the Zionist propaganda based on fundamental and racist rabbinical teachings on the
other. It is a fact that any religious creed can be equally adopted by people of various races and colors; whether they are Africans, Asians, or Europeans. How on Earth did Judaism become an
exception to this rule, and present itself as a "pure race", unlike any other creed known in the
world? Take a look at those who embrace Catholicism, for instance: you will find, among them, Arabs, Spaniards, Mexicans, Nigerians, even a small number of Japanese. Likewise, the Sunni creed has been adopted by people of all races and colors; from Arabs, to Afghans, to Senegalese, to Germans. How is it that the world came to view Judaism as the sole exception to this phenomenon? How can the Jews claim the purity of their so-called "race", and reserve for themselves the exclusive (albeit baseless) label of "Semitic", when the whole world has, for ages, witnessed the existence of Jews of various races and ethnicities? How can a Moroccan Jew,
for example, be of the same "race" as a Russian Jew, a Peruvian Jew, or even a Persian or an
Ethiopian Jew? Is their claim not an insult to all the known social, racial, and geographical principles? Does it not defy common sense?
If we analyze the rampant use of the terms "Jew" and "Israelite" today, we will find that they are considered to be synonymous, and are often used interchangeably, even by those who call
themselves Muslims. Hence, the common belief is that every Jew is an Israelite, and vice versa. The problem with this assumption is that it blatantly contradicts the Qur'ān. Allah's final scripture distinguishes very clearly between the concepts of Bani Isrā'eel (the Israelites) and Yahūd (Jews). The two are not synonymous, as the deluded occupants of Palestine and the vast majority of Muslims believe. According to the Qur'ān, Bani Isrā'eel were the descendants of a single man named Isrā'eel. It is worth noting here that the ancient tribes of Arabia were very often named after a fatherly figure. (Whether that figure was historical or legendary is another issue altogether). Famous examples of this phenomenon include: Bani Umayyah (the descendants of a man named Umayyah), Bani Hāshim (the descendants of a man named Hashim), Bani Qurayẓah (the descendants of a man named Qurayẓah), Bani 'Abbās (the descendants of a man named 'Abbās).
{Those are the ones whom Allah has blessed from among the prophets from the progeny of Ādam, and those We carried with Nūḥ, and from the progeny of Ibraheem and Isra'eel, and from whom We have guided and chosen. When the
revelations of the Almighty are recited to them, they fall down prostrating, and in
So as you can see, this man, Isra'eel, lived not too long after the time of Ibraheem, which places him close to Ya'qūb and Isḥāq (chronologically speaking). This was long before Judaism even existed as a creed.
{Or do you say that Ibraheem and Isma'eel and Isḥāq and Ya'qūb
and the Clans
were Jewish or Nazarenes?" Say: "Are you more knowledgeable or is Allah?" Who is wicked than the one who conceals a testimony with him from Allah? Allah is not unaware of what you do} [2:140] ...
Furthermore, the Qur'ān denies that Judaism is a tribe, national identity or race, and very clearly identifies it as being a millah, which means religious creed:
{Neither the Jews nor the Nazarenes will be pleased with you (O, Muḥammad) until
you follow their creed (millah). Say: "The guidance is the guidance of Allah." And if you follow their desires after the knowledge that has come to you, then there is
none who can help or protect you against Allah}…[2:120]
{And they said: "Be Jewish or Nazarenes so that you may be guided!" Say: "No,
rather the creed (millah) of Ibraheem,
was not
As can be seen from the above, the believers during Muḥammad's time were being pressured to adopt the creed of the Jews or the Naṣāra, so that they may be saved. How does one adopt a race?
Throughout history, the Judaic creed was accepted by various groups of people of distinct ethnicities, living in various geographical locations. It was also denounced by innumerable
individuals and groups, much the same as any other religious creed. The leaders of the Zionist propaganda machine succeeded in deceiving humanity, by convincing the masses that Judaism is a race and a national identity. Consequently, whenever any individual or group embraced the creed throughout history, they automatically became a "Descendant of Jacob", and were given title deed to the alleged "Promised Land" in Palestine. This was done irrespective of what that individual or group's background, nationality or ethnicity may have been, and regardless of whether their adoption of Judaism was before the Christian era, in the 11 th Century or even the
20 th Century AD. And the most spectacular example of this deceitful phenomenon that we will
eventually come across in this book is the story of the Khazars, a Turkic people who lived north of the Caucasus Mountains, and who converted from pagan worship to Judaism sometime during the 8 th Century AD.
Although it may sound strange to many people; the Qur'ān clearly says that the entire lineage of prophets, starting from Nūḥ and down to Muḥammad (P), lived in the same geographical region. Nowhere does the Qur'ān associate the Israelites with Palestine. Allah's final divine scripture recounted to Muḥammad's people the story of their own ancestors. The age-old presence of the Israelites as well as Judaism in Arabia is clearly attested to in old Arabian poetry. In fact, Judaism was the creed of the Yemeni kings of the Ḥimyaritic Dynasty, whose reign extended from 120 BC until the middle of the 6 th Century AD, when Ethiopia invaded Yemen at the behest of Rome.
Sometime between the 11 th Century and 9 th Century BC, the ancient Israelites established a substantially large kingdom in the Sarāt Country of South Arabia. The word sarāt literally means "heights", and denotes a geographical region encompassing the elevated plateau known as Najd, as well as the mountainous range stretching from the southern corner of the 'Aseer region in the north, all the way down past the "elbow" of Yemen in the south. This region is the greenest and most fertile strip of land in all of Arabia, and contains many volcanic peaks, some of which are still active today. In fact, these volcanos played a major role in the destruction of the town of Lūṭ as well as the People of the Elephant, as we will see later on.
These mountains, with their abundant river valleys and fortified slopes and peaks, the likes of which are not found anywhere in Palestine, match to the letter the geography of events described in both the Old Testament and the Qur'ān. The highest peak of the Sarāt is Jabal al-Nabi Shu'ayb (Mountain of the Prophet Shuaib) which lies west of Ṣan'ā' (Yemen's capital), and whose summit is approximately 3,700 meters above sea level.
The valleys of 'Aseer and Yemen have also been known to harbor breeding grounds for locusts, up until not too long ago. (So when you think of the Old Testament stories speaking of locusts and famine which plagued the land of Msrim, you know where to look). It is also the region that sees the most rainfall in all of Arabia, both in winter and in summer. It is a land known for its wooded mountains (Tūr), on which trees of many varieties grow, including Junipers, Lote trees Cedars, Acacia, Bramble, and Cyprus trees. Its mountain slopes have been made into stepped
terraces ideal for agriculture, for over 4000 years, and are among the most fertile regions in the Middle East. Figs, olives, dates, grapes, pomegranates and a wide variety of nuts and seeds are grown there until today. The honey of Yemen (the legendary Cedar Honey) is greatly prized globally, and considered one of the finest brands of honey in the world. It is a land known for its rich livestock grazing grounds as well as for its mineral resources of iron, gold, and copper, some of whose reserves remain untapped.
There, amid the mountain peaks and valleys stretching along the Red Sea coast, was once an extravagant domain established and ruled by Dāwūd (P) and inherited by his son, Sulaymān (P). Many relics of that distant era (the early Iron Age) are still scattered around the county-side, begging to be excavated. Later on, the Ḥimyarite Jewish monarchs of Yemen established their kingdom in that same region. In fact, we can safely say that the few Jews who still reside in Yemen today are the last remnants of the religion in the land of its birth.
South Arabia in general was also a region of great economic and political importance in the distant past, because of its location at the hub of the trade routes. Ships arriving from as far as China, carrying spices, ivory and textiles, would dock at the coastal ports of 'Ādan, and Qāna, while camel caravans would carry the goods to the Levant and Mesopotamia. It was a land of trade mediation, caravan service, as well as the primary source of two substances that were prized to the ancients more than gold: the legendary frankincense and myrrh of Yemen and Oman. So rich was this land that the Greek and Roman geographers and merchants labeled it "Arabia Felix", meaning "Happy Arabia" or "Fortunate Arabia".
The Red Sea coast, as we will show you in upcoming books, was a territory over which the Egyptians and the Assyrians (and later the Persians and the Romans) fought many wars. In fact, a number of monarchs of those ancient empires launched campaigns against the coastal region, and even delved deep into the heart of Arabia, sacking the prominent city of Najrān on several occasions. Many ancient Egyptian ruins and relics exist in Arabia, even as far north as the Ḥijāz region. Until recently, the Saudi rulers (ever the archeological enthusiasts that they are) have been reluctant to uncover those vestiges. The Assyrian and Babylonian campaigns, which we were deceived into believing had targeted Palestine, were in fact aimed at Arabia. Archeological evidence has been unearthed in the city of Taima'a (in the Ḥijāz), which showed that the city was, at one point, the winter capital for several Assyrian kings, and the launching point of several military expeditions directed at the Red Sea coast of Yemen, to discipline the rebellious Arab tribes who had control of the ancient trade routes. In fact, many prominent Arab historians, among them al-Ṭabari, were unanimous that the so-called Bakht-Naṣar of Assyria (none other than King Nebuchadnezzar) laid waste to the lands of Ḥijāz and Yemen in the bygone eras. For centuries, Arab scholars have read those puzzling passages in the history books, and either dismissed them as delusions or completely ignored them altogether, because they do not conform to the Zionist version of history that they had been fed.
In contrast, no archeological evidence has ever been presented to suggest that such wars had taken place over Palestinian territory. The land of ancient Palestine has been proven to be a peripheral region of little importance to the great powers of the time. In fact, it was not until around 250 BC when the current city of Jerusalem achieved any kind of significance in world affairs.
The forgotten Sarāt Country, whose history has been shrouded on purpose; hidden from the consciousness of the world, was the theater of the events surrounding a small yet special tribe from among the many tribes of ancient Yemen. This tribe, identified as Bani Isra'eel (the Children of Israel), had an experience somewhere in the slopes and valleys of Arabia's highlands, of which it left behind an intricate record. This record can be found today in the five books of the Old Testament that are called, by convention, "The Torah". This logbook was, at one point, very accurate and genuine, and documented the trials and tribulations that the Israelites went through as they struggled against pagan tribes and underwent a transition from a life of goat-herding to a sedentary life of agriculture and trade. Eventually, however, the black hands of corruption and forgery tampered with that record, starting from around the time of the Babylonian Exile.
The Israelites were not aliens to Arabia, nor did they flee to it from the Levant, as the twisted and corrupted rampant history tells us. They were among its original inhabitants. The science of archeology, which the Muslims loathe and despise, is just starting to prove this fact. And this can be confirmed from all that we know about anthropology as well (the study of human origins, migrations and settlements), which teaches us that humans, by nature, often flocked to places that provided them with opportunities for agriculture, game, or trade, until they were forced to leave by an enemy or invading force, or due to climate changes.
The false history that we have been taught and that we continue to teach our children in the universities of the East and West, tells us that the Israelites were not originally from Arabia, but had migrated or escaped to it from Palestine. This, according to the rampant sources, explains the presence of well-established Jewish communities later on (during Muḥammad's time), in cities such as Ṣan'ā', Najrān, and Ibb. This false history has managed to convince us that the documented presence of Jews as "far south" as Yemen was because small bands of them had migrated there as merchants during the time of King Solomon. (They insist that Sulaymān was a Jew, that his kingdom was in Palestine, and that the trade relations between ancient Israel and Sheba, during the 10 th Century BC, had dictated that many Jewish merchants move to Yemen!). And they have been propagating this garbage for centuries, cloaked behind the slogan of "God Said So", until modern archaeology began to expose their deception.
What we are proposing here is something radically different than what we have always perceived as the unquestionable truth: The Children of Israel were not refugees or migrates to Arabia. They simply originated there. Throughout the years, they benefited from solid leadership and, for a time at least, unshakable beliefs and principles, which made them very strong, and hence feared
and respected by most other tribes. And in an environment as lawless and as harsh as Arabia, where no more than 20% of the total area is habitable, one must have been very strong indeed to maintain his wealth and his land, and to protect it from raiders and looters. The time has come for us to change our perceptions and accept this truth, or we will be forever looking at our history through the eyes of others; the eyes of those corruptors and forgers who have turned that history upside down, and dictated to us a twisted account of the entire region.
All the stories of the previous peoples and the messengers that were sent to them, as related to us in the Qur'ān, had taken place in South Arabia, and nowhere else. And those criminals who scattered the legacy of the prophets to Egypt, Iraq and the Levant, dividing between father and son and between brother and brother, will have to answer to Allah for their falsehoods, racism, and crimes against history and humanity. Until we accept this fact, we will forever be lost in the desert of Jewish rabbinical delusions and Zionist propaganda.
Throughout ancient history, migration took place from Arabia, not to Arabia. We have been looking at the picture upside down. It is high time we rotated it and set it right. The ancient Arabian tribes, falsely labeled as "Semitic" (a racist term coined by an Austrian Zionist in the
19 th Century), migrated from Arabia, and moved toward the Levant (Palestine and Syria) and to
Mesopotamia. This fact, often reiterated by the ancient Greek and Roman geographers and explorers, has now been confirmed by modern anthropology. The ancient Israelites were no more than one of those many migrating tribes, who eventually established a significant presence in Palestine, some two centuries after the Babylonian Exile, for reasons that will be evident later on in our journey. Relocation from Arabia was the correct direction of all ancient displacements of people, not the other way around.
The first thing that migrating tribes often did was to give the geographical features of their new home territory the same names that were known in their original homeland. This reflected their eagerness to keep an emotional linkage with the land of their birth. This process was known to the ancient Arabs as tayammun (the word is derived from yumn, which carries a sense of good fortune or optimism). Lebanese scholar Farajallah Ṣaleh Deeb, in his book published in 1988 and entitled (lit): Yemen is the Origin: The Arabic Roots of Names, provided staggering evidence that the names of over 200 geographical locations in the Levant (Syria and Lebanon) are actually names whose original counterparts were in Yemen. In fact, Lebanon itself was named after a mountain of the same name in Yemen, famous for its snow-caped peak. Likewise, Tyr and Sidon (two Lebanese cities on the Mediterranean coast) took their names from their original "parents" in South Arabia. To those who can read Arabic, we highly recommend Deeb's book. At any rate, we will take an in-depth look into the phenomenon of migrating names in a later chapter.
Our ultimate aim in this book is to examine the biography of the Patriarch Ibraheem (P), an account that was the target of a malicious scheme of corruption perpetrated, on purpose, by a legion of human devils. This scheme ultimately served one sole purpose: to hijack the history
of Arabia for the benefit of imperialist and colonial powers. We will present to you, dear reader, undeniable proofs that may came as quite shocking, that the story of Ibraheem is a genuine Arabian legend that has absolutely no relation to Palestine whatsoever. We will prove that Ibraheem was born somewhere in the central plains of Yemen, not far from the Ḥaḍramawt valley, then migrated westwards towards the lush green oases of the mountainous Sarāt country, where he eventually settled in the valley of Bakkah, at the site of the ancient Sanctuary (al-Bayt), and re-established the tenets of Monotheism in Arabia, thus becoming known as "The Patriarch". Ibraheem (P) lived, preached, and died in Arabia, and his grave, according to the legends passed down for millennia among the tribes of Yemen, is somewhere in that forgotten country. The legacy of his children, Isḥāq and Ya'qūb, has been told and retold countless times in the tribal folk ballads (psalms) of Yemen, and their names are mentioned clearly in the legendary genealogical trees of that country.
The path of our journey, dear reader, will now take a critical turn, as we uncover the source of confusion that is evident in the books of the Arab historians concerning Ibraheem's journey. Together, we will untangle the webs of the monstrous conspiracy that has marginalized the Arabian Peninsula, and kept its history shrouded behind a veil of lies and deceit. But before we do that, we will expose to you the conditions and circumstances that led to the creation of a Zionist state in Palestine, and how the elements of a Jewish "racial identity" (land, language, and history) were artificially created, in what was to become the greatest cultural forgery that mankind has ever known.
* * * * *
"It is not a waste of time, proving that others have wasted theirs".
- Ziād Minah
This state shall be, for Europe, a barrier against Asia and a bastion for civilization in the face of barbarism.
(Theodore Herzl - The Jewish State)
In the year 1948 AD, the Zionist entity known as "Israel" was planted like a thorn in the waist of the Arab world, in order to keep the region in a state of constant unrest; to single out its various nations and drain their resources and energies, and to thwart all efforts aimed at unity among its peoples. The imperialistic powers founded this entity on the basis of lies and fabrications, coinciding with the time when Zionist propaganda became at the forefront of the Western media. Once the history of the region was dismantled and re-written to suit their own interests, the entire stretch of territory encompassing Iraq, the Levant, and Egypt, suddenly became the legacy of the Jewish ancestors, of whom not a single archeological trace was ever found in the area before the Babylonian Exile. Consequently, the great pyramids and the Sphinx of Giza became, almost overnight, a cultural vestige of David Ben-Gurion's ancestors!
Ask yourself the following question: What does it take to fabricate a national identity from scratch? The three essential elements that first come to mind are: history, geography, and language. After hijacking the history of the region and projecting the events described in the Old Testament from their true theater (South Arabia) onto Palestine, the Zionist Movement commissioned a Russian Jewish literary figure by the name of Eliezer ben‑Yehuda to invent a language derived from one of Arabia's extinct dialects; and thus modern "Hebrew" was born. In other words, they swallowed an entire nation (from the Euphrates to the Nile) in bright daylight. It was thus that Ariel Sharon, Ehud Barak, Yitzhak Rabin, and other Europeans of their ilk, became the sole legitimate inheritors of an ancient Arabian tribe that lived in Yemen! This historical forgery, the likes of which mankind has never witnessed, eventually led the way to a mass migration of Jews from all corners of the world. The Zionist program, playing on the emotions of the religious masses, used the Jews as scapegoats to implement the imperialist plan of annexing Palestine, by marketing the ideology of its territory being the central part of the alleged "Promised Land".
Through this process, The West achieved what it had hoped for all along: to rid itself of a Jewish population which, by that time, had lost its societal function and begun to constitute a burden for Europe. This predicament was caused by the massive social and economic changes that had swept over the continent. The Jews had been living in Europe for centuries, in a state of total isolation brought about by the nature of the trade they conducted on one hand, as well as the growing sentiment of antipathy that besieged them, specifically on the part of the Christian majority, on the other hand. In fact, the label of "A People without a Land" that was used to
describe the Jews, was a manifestation of that sentiment. The truth is that the Jews of Europe were in fact of pure European blood. In other words, a German Jew was indeed a German national, while an English Jew was likewise an Englishman in every sense of the word. Does this fact not raise serious questions about the "People without a Land" allegation? But the more pressing question is: Just how did Judaism become a race and a national identity?
The London Conference and Establishment of the "Buffer State"
As we write the pages of this book, over a century has passed since the imperialist conference of London was held, at the behest of Britain, from 1905 until 1907. The London Conference witnessed the birth of a series of international resolutions that have ultimately led to the current state of affairs in the Arab World. The Conference was attended by an elite group of Europe's most intellectual thinkers and professors in various fields; from economical to commercial; from political to agricultural, from historical to social; and culminated in the formation of a committee that represented all the colonial powers during that period. At the end of the two-year congregation, the Committee presented a recommendation letter to the British Prime Minister at the time, Campbell Bannerman. Here follows is an excerpt from the infamous Bannerman Report of 1907, which concluded the Conference:
"There are people (i.e. the Arabs) who control spacious territories teeming with manifest and hidden resources. They dominate the intersections of world routes. Their lands were the cradles of human civilizations and religions. These people have one faith, one language, one history and the same aspirations. No natural barriers can isolate these people from one
another … if, per chance, this nation were to be unified into one state, it would then take
the fate of the world into its hands and would separate Europe from the rest of the world. Taking these considerations seriously, a foreign body should be planted in the heart of this nation to prevent the convergence of its wings in such a way that it could exhaust its powers in never-ending wars. It could also serve as a springboard for the West to gain its coveted objects."
What exactly are those objectives "coveted" by the West? We think the answer is quite obvious:
1- To promote disintegration, division, and separation in the region (the Arab World).
2- To establish artificial political entities (puppet regimes) that would be under the authority of the imperialist countries.
3- To fight any kind of unity - whether intellectual, religious or historical - and taking practical measures to divide the region's inhabitants.
To achieve the above objectives, it was proposed that a "buffer state" be established in Palestine, populated by a strong, foreign presence that would be hostile to its neighbors and friendly to
European countries and their interests. And thus the way was paved for the eventual establishment of the artificial state of Israel. But why a Jewish state in particular?
The answer to that question lay in the societal changes that affected Europe starting from the second half of the 19 th Century. While the Arab Jews of North Africa, Iraq, Palestine and Yemen lived in total harmony with their societies at the time, the European Jews had been living in almost total isolation in their ghettos for several centuries and were, to a certain extent, victims of persecution by the Christian majority. This was brought about in part because of the European Jews' own tendency for seclusion and refusal to integrate with their societies at large. Their firm belief that they were the Israelites of the Bible, and hence "God's Chosen People", only added strength to their conviction that they could not co-exist peacefully with others. As a result, they could not achieve a harmonious existence in the modern and nationalist states that were emerging in Europe at the time. The European Jews viewed the ideas of fraternity, equality and justice for all - the hallmarks of the French Revolution - to be in direct conflict with their beliefs and to pose a danger to their ideological identity.
On the other hand, the usurious nature of the trade they practiced often invited resentment and enmity towards them. The Jews did not view their usurious dealings to be shameful or wrong in any way; on the contrary, they viewed their trade to be divinely decreed to them by God. In fact, Karl Marx (who was a Jew himself), in his infamous book entitled A World without Jews, once
said of them: "What is the object of the Jew's worship in this world? Usury. What is his
worldly god? Money". This comment by Marx was not made from the perspective of a critic as much as from the perspective of simply stating the facts and explaining how and why the European Jews (in particular those of Russian, Polish and Hungarian decent) achieved such high status in their societies, and were able to infiltrate most global corporate and power circles and centers of decision-making not just in Europe, but in many countries of the former Soviet Union and the Western world.
Picture #1: Campbell Bannerman
And so it was that Europe struck two birds with one stone: they found a solution to an unwanted Jewish population that had lost its societal function in the continent and, at the same time, established that same population in the Palestinian territory to serve as a buffer state, strategically planted at the cross-roads of the Asian and African wings of the Arab world, and near the Suez canal, to serve the imperialist and colonial interests of the West.
Marketing the Lie
George Carlin once called religion "the all-time champion of false promises and exaggerations". Speaking of false promises, the Zionist movement understood fully that in order to realize their plan of establishing an alien entity in the heart of the Arab world, they had to play on the emotions of the religious Jews of Europe, by convincing them that they were the descendants of the Biblical Israelites, and that the territory of Palestine was the central part of their so-called "Promised Land", and the site of the legendary Temple of God, built by King Solomon sometime during the 10 th Century BC. Likewise, the Zionists had to win over the consent of as many Western Christians as possible, by convincing them that Jesus would not return to Earth until the Jews were allowed to re-build their temple on the so-called Temple Mount (they insist that the knoll on which Jerusalem stands is a mountain!). The emotional attachment that many European and American Christians have had with the city of Jerusalem in particular, facilitated the fruition of the Zionist scheme.
Hence, Zionism is, at its core, a purely political movement with colonial and imperialist ramifications. In fact, the intellectual minds (lawyers, business men, and media tycoons) who strove for the establishment of the so-called "State of Israel" were mostly secular laymen who simply used religion as a tool to achieve their end, by fooling the religious Jewish and Christian communities of the West with the mythological creed that the migration of the Jews to the Palestinian territory would accelerate the coming of the promised Messiah. This is but an example of how the elite sow infectious superstitions in the minds of the masses, as a means of social control and manipulation. The belief in Jesus's return has equally established itself as a fundamental creed in the "Islamic" faith, despite the fact that it blatantly contradicts the Qur'ān. But then again, the so-called "Muslims" have made the Qur'ān of no account. They have been reciting its passages like zombies for centuries, without making even the slightest effort to understand its message.
At the forefront of this political movement was the secular Hungarian Jewish lawyer and activist Theodor Herzl, who had a major hand in bringing the Zionist plan to fruition, as he saw in it the most effective solution to the problem of the Jewish masses that had lost their function in Europe. Late French scholar and thinker Roger Garaudy emphasized these facts, when he said:
"The spiritual father of Zionism was, without a doubt, Theodor Herzl, who ignited the imperialist desire for the creation of (Israel) as a buffer state that would benefit the
interests of the West, and spearhead the colonial infiltration into the region".
Herzl worked with utmost dedication to reach his goal. In 1896, he met with the Ottoman Sultan, 'Abdul' Ḥameed, whom he tempted with various material inducements. Herzl offered to fully settle the Ottoman Empire's national debt in exchange for allowing Jewish immigration and the establishment of an independent entity in Palestine. Aware of the latent objectives behind Herzl's plan, 'Abdul' Ḥameed refused the offer, thus angering the Jews, and ultimately bringing about his downfall at the hands of an association known as the "Young Turkey Movement", which was famous for harboring a large number of Jews from among the Dönmeh community (the Dönmeh were Sephardic Jews, refugees to the Ottoman Empire, having migrated from Western Europe, especially from Spain, in order to escape the brutality of the Catholic commissions there).
Picture #2: Theodor Herzl
The most blatant fallacy marketed by Herzl was that the Jews of the world constituted one homogenous "Semitic" nation, while the remainder of humanity were essentially "non-Semitic".
He concluded that: "If we reside for any length of time, in peace and security, in any society, then we run the risk of total fusion. This is not in the interest of Judaism".
As the time for the establishment of the Jewish state neared, the Zionists realized that they needed to assemble the necessary ingredients for their ideological entity. And so it was that the greatest historical forgery mankind has ever known began to take shape, as the components of a Jewish nation were artificially created from scratch. This was done by means of:
1- Hijacking the history of the Levant and claiming it a relic of ancient Israelite culture. 2- Inventing a "Hebrew" language and claiming it to be the ancestral tongue of the Biblical Israelites. 3- Projecting the events of the Old Testament stories and legends from their true theater (South Arabia) onto Egypt and the Levant, thus hijacking the geography of Allah's messengers in the process.
In our first book, The Search for Pharaoh, we gave you a glimpse of how the archeological excavations in Egypt and Palestine exposed the fallacy of the Zionist interpretation of the Biblical stories. We will have a more in-depth look at these archeological findings in our upcoming third book. What we can say for now, with absolute certainty, is that there is zero documented or physical proof of the presence of the ancient Israelites in Egypt, or any record of their escape into the so-called "Sinai Peninsula". Furthermore, archeologists have failed miserably at proving any significant Jewish presence in Palestine before the 4 th Century BC. The implications of this fact are quite clear: ancient Israel (the Biblical kingdom of Solomon) was not anywhere in the Levant. This truth has recently begun to dawn even on the neo-historians and archeologists of the West. Nowhere is this more evident than in the words of Ze'ev Herzog, Professor of Biblical Archeology at the Tel-Aviv University. In an article posted in the Haaretz
newspaper in 1999, Herzog wrote: "It is apparent that there is a very wide gulf between the Old Testament accounts of the region's ancient history and what the excavations on the ground have actually revealed. Modern science, as we know, does not rely on written
stories, but on physical and archeological findings. And archeology has made enough progress to be considered an independent science on its own. What is happening in (Israel) is that we do not want it to be independent. We want the findings to support the Biblical accounts. This contradicts not only science, but the historical truth as a whole. And if we want to maintain our credibility in the international academic circles, we have to abide by
the processes of science, not the dogma of politics and ideologies".
What is perhaps ironic is the fact that this was the same newspaper that, two years earlier, contained an article in which Morton Klein, the head of the Zionist Organization of America (back then), replied to what he called "Lies of the Palestinian Liberation Organization". In 1997, Palestinian Professor of history Jared al-Kidwah, made the following bold declaration during a
televised conference: "The events surrounding the kings Saul, David and Rehboam took place
in Yemen. The reason they did not find any ancient (Hebrew) ruins in Palestine is simply
because the Biblical Israelites were never there
is witness to what I say: In my veins
runs more of the blood of ancient Israel than in the veins of Benjamin Netanyahu and Ariel
The Zionist reply to Kidwah's declaration was swift and grave. In a July 1997 issue of Haaretz,
Morton Klein wrote: "Yasser Arafat has failed to condemn the recent lies perpetrated by the PLO, claiming that there is no relation between modern Jews and the Biblical Israelites. This contradicts our most basic Jewish beliefs. It seems that Mr. Arafat has understood well the lesson he got from other dictators of his kind; that the bigger the lie, and the more it is repeated and reiterated to the public, the more readily the public will perceive it as the
truth. (An allusion by Klein to a famous speech made by Adolf Hitler during a conference of the
Nazi Party on the verge of World War II).
It is imperative that Yasser Arafat order his
propagandists to stop spreading these lies and to apologize to the Jewish population of the world".
Who, then, is the liar? Are the Jews who began migrating to Palestine during the first half of the
20 th Century truly the descendants of the Biblical Israelites? Let us see what some Jewish
authors and scholars have said concerning this issue.
The Khazarian Conspiracy
In the year 1954, American anti-Zionist activist Benjamin Freedman (1890 - 1984) wrote the following in a letter addressed to Dr. David Goldstein (LL.D. of Boston, Massachusetts),
explaining the history of the Khazarian Jews: "The so-called or self-styled 'Jews' in eastern Europe in modern history cannot legitimately point to a single ancient ancestor who ever set even a foot on the soil of Palestine in the era of Bible history. Research also revealed that the so-called or self-styled 'Jews' in eastern Europe were never 'Semites', are not 'Semites' now, nor can they ever be regarded as 'Semites' at any future time by any stretch of the imagination. Exhaustive research also irrevocably rejects as a fantastic fabrication the generally accepted belief by Christians that the so-called or self-styled 'Jews' in eastern Europe are the legendary 'Chosen People' so very vocally publicized by the Christian clergy
from their pulpits." Goldstein's initial reply to Freedman's letter was one of genuine astonishment, as the former had not previously heard any mention of the term "Khazar" in any
historical reference in the United States. The name was completely alien to him. Freedman, a former Jew who later converted to Catholicism, replied with the following: "That must give
you some idea, my dear Dr. Goldstein, of how successful that mysterious secret power was with their plot to block out the origin and the history of the Khazars and Khazar Kingdom in order to conceal from the world, particularly from Christians, the true origin and the history
of the so-called or self-styled 'Jews' in eastern Europe
Khazars were not 'Semites'.
They were an Asiatic-Mongoloid nation. They are racially classified by modern anthropologists as being Turco-Finns. In the 8 th Century AD, King Bulan, ruler at that time of the Khazar Kingdom, decided to abolish the practice of phallic worship and other forms of
idolatrous worship, and to make one of the three monotheistic religions, about which he knew very little, the new state religion. After a historic session with representatives of the three monotheistic religions, King Bulan decided against Christianity and Islam, and selected as the future state religion what was then known as 'Talmudism' - and now known and practiced worldwide as Judaism - This event is well documented in history. After the conversion of King Bulan, none but a so-called or self-styled 'Jew' could occupy the Khazar throne. The ideologies of the Talmud became the axis of political, cultural, economic and social attitudes and activities throughout the Khazar kingdom. The Talmud provided civil and religious law."
Just what was Benjamin Freedman talking about when he made his bold declaration? Who exactly were the Khazars, and where was their kingdom located? What were the political motives behind their adoption of Judaism? It is worth mentioning, before we give you the details, that in 1951, barely three years before Freedman wrote his famous letter, retired U.S. Military Intelligence Officer, Col. John Beaty, published a scholarly book entitled Iron Curtain Over America, wherein he gave overwhelming evidence that the strange race of Eastern European "Jews" were actually Khazar and Mongol Asiatics, and had no relation to the Biblical Israelites
whatsoever. He also proved that these "Jews" had a stranglehold on American politics, on banking and credit, on all sources of news, on the entertainment industry, on America's education system, and that they were the predominant race as judges, lawyers, doctors, and even had a hand in the realm of organized crime. The Jewish news media refused to review the book. Jewish book dealers refused to handle it. Christian book stores ignored it, and only a few thousand copies were distributed. Most Americans have never heard of Iron Curtain over America. Now, however, the book has been reprinted, and is available.
A thousand years before the establishment of the Zionist State of Israel, there existed a nominally Jewish kingdom on the eastern fringes of Europe - a kingdom that the Zionists and their allied powers-that-be in the world don't want you to know about. This was the Kingdom of the Khazars, and it was located astride the Don and Volga rivers. The Khazars were a Turkic people who originated in Central Asia and it is believed that reddish hair was predominant among them, before the Mongol conquests that eventually altered their gene pool. The Khazars were originally nomads who spoke a Turkic language and believed in Tengri shamanism, a spiritual religion among whose hallmarks was the worship of the male phallus.
Khazaria extended from the Black Sea to the Caspian and from the Caucasus Mountain range to the Volga, and its military power played a major role in principal wars in the region. In the early
7 th Century AD, the Khazars aided the Byzantine emperor Heraclius (reigned 610-641) in his
campaign against the Persian State. In the 7 th and 8 th Centuries, they defended the south-eastern
frontier of Europe from invasion by the Arabs. Although victory passed repeatedly from Arab to Khazar, Arab counterattacks finally compelled the Khazars to permanently withdraw north of the Caucasus. These hostilities are the so-called Arab-Khazar Wars, which effectively stopped Islamic incursions into eastern Christendom. Khazaria therefore acted as a buffer state between the Islamic world and the Christian world, and prevented Islam from significantly spreading north of the Caucasus Mountains. But there was a problem. By the mid-8 th century, Khazaria's own power was becoming encroached by two major world powers: the Eastern Roman Empire centered at Byzantium on one side, and the rapid spread of the Arabs on the other.
The Khazar Empire, representing a significant third force, was courted by the other two powers that both pressured it to adopt their respective religion. It appeared that Khazaria could only maintain its political and ideological independence by rejecting both Christianity and Islam, for either choice would have automatically subordinated it to the authority of the Roman Emperor or the Caliph of Baghdad. Not wishing to be dominated by either of the two, the Khagan (Khazarian royal title) did a canny thing: he embraced the Jewish faith in 740 AD, and ordered his subjects to do the same. By resisting the blandishments of both Byzantium and the Caliphate and deciding to convert to Judaism, the third monotheistic religion, Khazaria retained its neutrality between Christianity and Islam. Moreover, adopting Judaism was not only a symbol of political independence for Khazaria, but it also held the balance of power between Muslim Caliphate and
the Christian Byzantine Empire. The Khazarian kingdom reached the zenith of its power during the 11 th and 12 th Centuries AD, before the Khazars were eventually defeated and pushed into Eastern Europe by the Mongol conquest.
Another author who wrote about the Khazars was Arthur Koestler (1905-1983). In his book entitled The Thirteenth Tribe (published in 1976), Koestler speculates about the ultimate faith of the Khazars and their impact on the racial composition and social heritage of modern Jewry. He produces a large body of meticulously detailed research showing staggering evidence that 90% of the world's Jewish population are of the Ashkenazi branch, and their lineage can be traced back to the Khazarian kingdom. Hence the ancestors of the European Jews are not related to the Biblical Israelites in any way, shape, or form. The implications of this fact is that the term "Anti- Semitism", employed by the Zionists to label anyone who voiced an opinion that opposed their ideology, is a term that is, as Koestler himself put it: "void of meaning and based on a
misapprehension shared by both the killers and their victims". Koestler went on to say: "The
story of the Khazar Empire, as it slowly emerges from the past, begins to look like the most cruel hoax which history has ever perpetrated." In his conclusion, Koestler stated that: "The evidence presented in the previous chapters adds up to a strong case in favor of those modern historians - whether Austrian, Israeli or Polish - who, independently from each other, have argued that the bulk of modern Jewry is not of Palestinian, but of Caucasian
As expected, The Thirteenth Tribe caused a stir when published in 1976, since it demolished ancient racial and ethnic dogmas. At the height of the controversy in 1983, the lifeless bodies of Arthur Koestler and his wife were found in their London home. Despite significant inconsistencies in the police report, the couple's death was ruled a suicide.
What does this tell us? Does it not answer the question of who has been lying and deceiving the masses for the past century or so? Why don't we read what the Jewish Encyclopedias themselves have to say about the Ashkenazi Jews:
- The 1980 Jewish Almanac (page 3):
"Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a 'Jew' or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or a Hebrew."
- The Jewish Encyclopedia:
"Khazars: A non-Semitic, Asiatic, Mongolian tribal nation who emigrated into Eastern Europe about the first century, who were converted as an entire nation to Judaism in the seventh century by the expanding Russian nation which absorbed the entire Khazar population, and who account for the presence in Eastern Europe of the great numbers of
Yiddish-speaking Jews in Russia, Poland, Lithuania, Galatia, Besserabia and Rumania...
Aproximately 96% of all the Jews known to the world today are descendants of the Khazar tribes of Russia, Eastern Europe and western Mongolia".
- The American Peoples Encyclopedia:
"In the year 740 A.D. the Khazars were officially converted to Judaism. A century later they were crushed by the incoming Slavic-speaking people and were scattered over central
Europe where they were known as Jews".
Our question to you dear reader, is the following: On whom has the joke been? After all that you have read so far, can you still say that Judaism is a race? How does one "convert" to a race? How does one suddenly "adopt" a racial identity?
The shattering truth is that the Jews who answered the Zionist call and migrated to the Palestinian territory in 1948 are European Jews from Eastern Europe (Hungary, Poland, Russia, Romania, Lithuania and Ukraine), whose ancestry can be traced back to Khazaria. They are originally a Turkic people whose ancestors never even set foot in the land of Palestine, nor in Arabia for that matter.
Map #1: The Khazarian kingdom at its peak (10 th Century AD)
Conclusion: the Jews who occupy the Palestinian territory today are not the Biblical Israelites. And here follows is our answer to Morton Klein: What you said concerning the means by which a lie is propagated and marketed to the masses is absolutely true, and applies to your Zionist ilk, foremost among all people, and to the propagandists whom you have been financing for the past
century. It is you and your criminal ancestors who have hijacked the history of humanity as we know it, proclaimed yourselves members of a superior "Semitic" race, plundered and raped the lands of innocents, and perfected the art of lies and deceptions to a degree that would put the Nazis themselves to shame. Archeology has and will continue to expose the crimes you have perpetrated against history, and the world is slowly awakening to the truths that you have been conspiring to hide. Keep on excavating and burrowing the length and width of Palestine. Dig until you reach the core of the Earth itself. You will never find what it is you seek there. Allah- willing, you are digging nothing but your own graves".
The "Hebrew" Deception
In order for the Zionist movement to successfully hijack the history of the region and plant their cancerous, racist, and illegitimate entity in the heart of the Arab world, it was necessary to artificially create the elements required for their so-called "racial nationality". Foremost among those elements is language.
"Language is the nation. And the nation is the language. And there is no life for the nation
without a language". These were the words of Eliezar bin-Yehuda, the man who is credited as the "reviver" of the so-called "Hebrew" language. Bin-Yehuda understood, ever since the beginning of the Zionist project, the importance and necessity of this matter for the continuity of the Jewish "nationality". In fact, there were many common means used by both the Nazis of Germany and the Zionist movement to achieve their goals. One of those means was: "Lie, lie, lie and keep on lying, until eventually, the people will believe you". The Zionists kept on claiming, since the beginning of their colonial project, that there was once, a long time ago, a divine language called "Hebrew", and that it was the language of God's Chosen People, that was eventually lost or became "dormant" when the "Hebrews" were scattered and exiled from their alleged "Promised Land".
David Ben Gurion, the first prime minister of Israel, once said: "The Hebrew language died out,
because it hasn't been a spoken language for over 2000 years". This statement, and many
others along its line, were used to explain why the "language" is mysteriously not found in any ancient dictionary or glossary, and is not mentioned in any historic document the world has ever known. The fact is, as we will soon conclude, that there was never any language in the entire region but Arabic and the various dialects that derived from it: Aramaic, Syriac, Old Yemeni,
Amorite, Phoenician, etc…
Encyclopedia Britannica states that: "The original authors of the Old Testament are unknown; furthermore, it is not certain whether those who compiled it were individuals or groups. The Old Testament was originally recorded almost exclusively in Hebrew, with the
exception of very few passages which were recorded in Aramaic. The first Jewish community eventually translated the entire text of the Torah (the Five Books) to Aramaic".
Isn't it strange that it has never occurred to anyone to ask the following questions?
1- Why was it translated to Aramaic? 2- Who was this "first" Jewish group or community responsible for this translation? 3- If the language had been dead for 2000 years, how did it suddenly "pop up", alive and well, in Palestine, in the 20 th Century, and coinciding with the return to the alleged "Promised Land"?
Did this "Hebrew" language even exist in the first place? An article written by Professor G.A. Driver, who taught Modern Hebrew at Oxford University, UK, stated: "The Term 'Hebrew' is
actually a creation of the Jewish Rabbis in Palestine, which came at a much later time. This is proven by the fact that the word was not known or used to refer to the Jews in Russia, until after the 15 th Century".
The Zionist movement commissioned prominent Russian literary figure Eliezar bin-Yehuda, who was among the first immigrants to Palestine, to write a linguistic glossary based on an ancient Arabian tongue, mixed with the Yiddish dialect of the German Jews. Bin-Yehuda wrote the entire framework for this new language, and sought to spread it among the new Jewish community in Palestine. Giant French scholar and thinker Pierre Rossi, in his outstanding book entitled (lit): The City of Isis – the True History of the Arabs (pages 28,29) says: "Modern
Hebrew is an invention
of the Russian
Eliazar, who published a literary and linguistic
glossary in
the period
from 1910
the global
movement, and proposed it as a kind of 'Esperanto' for the Jews in all corners of the world,
who had been promised a new home in Palestine. It was nothing but a political tool".
other words, a lie created for political manipulation).
The invention of this "Modern Hebrew" language was a very crucial condition for the success of the colonial Zionist movement. This language, of which there is not a single mention in any document, text, or archeological trace, in the entire literary history of the ancient world, suddenly
became a living reality! "No mention of it is found in any of the thousands of cuneiform and hieroglyphic texts….nor even in any ancient Aramaic document was ever a single reference to a Hebrew language" (Rossi, page 25).
Eliazar called for making "Hebrew" the language of the age for the new Jewish settlers, to be spoken by the youngsters in their homes, in their schools, and on the streets. The goal was to artificially create all the elements needed for a new "racial nationality". In his excellent study entitled (lit): Zionist Racism and the Philosophy of Jewish Upbringing, Professor 'Abdulqāder
Fāris says: "And so Hebrew became the official
language; so much
so, that
the elderly
generations who had immigrated to Palestine were forced to learn it from their children!
This is because the fathers who had left their original homelands in Europe, had never heard of such a language, so they had to learned it from the younger generations".
Is it possible, dear reader, that all those scholars were delusional? Or is it the Zionist propaganda machine that has played the public for fools? The fact is that the term "Hebrew" was never known - by the European Jewish communities - as a term designating a language, until the 1920's, when the Zionist project began taking shape.
We will show you now, dear reader, a glimpse of the truth that what we have always thought were independent "Semitic" languages, are in fact nothing but various dialects originating from one mother language or proto-tongue, so to speak. This fact has been declared time and time again by anthropologists and linguists since the end of the 19 th Century, among them: William Wright, Paul Edward Dhorme, Sabatino Moscati, Kamāl Ṣaleebi, Pierre Rossi, and many others, all of whom have successfully demonstrated that the so-called "Semitic" languages did indeed have one common origin. (Think of it as somewhat like French, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian all being offshoots of the original Latin tongue).
These academics have conducted extensive research on the dialects of Arabia and Mesopotamia, and found glaring similarities between them, notably: the presence of three-letter verb roots for the words, the presence of two tenses (past and present) for those verbs, as well as very similar conjugation structures between them. In all these dialects, there are obvious resemblances among the pronouns, the words that indicate sibling relationships, the names of body parts, numbers, and natural phenomena, among others. This led to only one possible conclusion: the original community from which sprang all the so-called "Semitic" people must have spoken a language that was most similar to Arabic. In this regard, Sabatino Moscati says: "In light of all the
information that we, as anthropologists have been able to gather, there is now undeniable evidence which indicates that the wilderness of the Arabian Peninsula is the point of origin for all Semitic migrations".
Moscati's observation is in line with that of other academics and scholars of the modern age, notably Arnold J. Toynbee (1889-1975), and William J. Durant, both of whom have pointed out that the Arabian Peninsula, specifically its southern part, may well have been the cradle of human civilization. The implications of this discovery for our study are massive, and it is beyond the scope of this book to fully elaborate on them. What we can say for now, with a great degree of certainty, is that what is popularly known as the "Semitic" race - despite our reservations against the use of this term - most probably originated in the Arabian Peninsula. This is in fact in line with observations made by the ancient Greek historians, notably Herodotus, who stated that the inhabitants of Phoenicia were originally immigrants from the Red Sea coast. It was the ancient migrates from Arabia, starting from the 15 th millennium BC, who eventually established civilizations in Mesopotamia, Egypt and the Levant. In the heading entitled "Arabia", in the Catholic Encyclopedia, we read the following:
"Arabia is the cradle of Islam and, in all probability, the primitive home of the Semitic race".
The following table demonstrates a small sample of the similarities between the so-called "Semitic" languages. The first column (on the left hand side) contains the words in English. The subsequent columns contain the transliteration of each word in several other languages:
Ancient Yemeni
Modern "Hebrew"
ّ Father
ّ aba
ّ Brother
ّ aḥu
ّ Hand
ّ yad
ّ Eye
ّ 'ayn
ّ Eight
ّ shamāna
ّ Ten
ّ 'ashr
ّ Bull
ّ shūr
ّ Camel
ّ jemal
ّ jamal
ّ Water
ّ māym
ّ Earth
ّ arṣ
ّ shalam
ّ shalom
ّ calem
ّ shlāmu
ّ salām
Late Lebanese historian and linguist Kamāl Ṣaleebi, who specialized in what is known as "Hebrew" until it became a second language to him, reiterated Moscati's observation that the so- called "Semitic" languages were originally dialectic offshoots of an original and older proto- tongue, and that the common ancestor of those dialects was most probably closer to Arabic. In his famous book The Bible Came from Arabia (published in 1985), Ṣaleebi states: "All this
leads us to the conclusion that the three languages in question (Phoenician, Aramaic and
Arabic) actually existed side by side, from Yemen to the Levant
is nothing strange in
the fact that Arabic coexisted with Aramaic as far back as the Biblical times. This is because Arabic, from a purely Phonetic and morphological perspective, is the oldest of the three
How did the experts reach the conclusion that Arabic is the oldest of the "Semitic" languages?
The answer lies in the vast phonetic roots of Arabic. The fact is that Arabic has a far greater
variety of consonantal sounds than any of the other languages, including what is falsely referred to as "Hebrew". From a purely linguistic perspective, sounds that were originally independent phonemes in the proto-tongue (common ancestor language) of the region combined to form allophones in all the dialects, except for Arabic, where they remained discrete phonemes. This means that the so-called "Semitic" dialects (Aramaic, Syriac, Phoenician, Old Yemeni*, etc ) ... could not possibly have pre-existed Arabic. This is because Arabic is the only language that has preserved all the features of the ancestor tongue, whereas those features are absent in the other dialects. Consequently, it is not possible for Arabic to have been a descendant of those dialects, as is commonly believed. A whole does not come out of a part. What this means, ultimately, is that the common ancestor of all the so-called "Semitic" languages was much closer to Arabic than to any of the other offshoot dialects.
Proving that Arabic is the closet language to the proto-tongue and common ancestor of all the known dialects is certainly possible, but requires a separate study of its own. It is not within the scope of this book to present all the evidence for this theory. The observations made by Ṣaleebi, as supported by other contemporary academics, as well as the latest anthropological findings concerning the early human civilizations and the trends in human migration, must be taken very seriously. What we can say now, with a great degree of certainty, is that the southern quarter of the Arabian Peninsula was indeed the cradle of human civilization, and the true - albeit forgotten - theater of the stories and legends of Allah's messengers, from Nūḥ (P), down the line to Muḥammad (P). The presence of towering mountains and badlands in the Arabian Peninsula, not to mention the primitive means of communication in those bygone eras, must have given rise to different dialects; original offshoots that derived from the proto-tongue. These dialects were spoken by tribes and clans that, at first, lived together in the same general geographical setting, before eventually wandering out of the Peninsula in successive and continuous migrations; whether for reasons related to climate, competition for fertile land, or because of invasions or wars. This of course assumes various phenomena in line with these anthropological facts, notably that the spread of people in mass exoduses from Arabia, over thousands of years, led to further evolution of those offshoot dialects, until they eventually became separate languages, as people strayed further away from their point of origin. On the other hand, this necessitates that the original, or common ancestor of all those dialects be preserved, at least in its spoken form (if not in alphabet) by a small group or class of people who remained around the point of origin, and thus preserved most of the characteristics of the proto-tongue. And it was precisely that group of people to whom Ibraheem (P) had migrated in the distant past (around 1600 BC).
* The term "Old Yemeni" is used throughout this text to indicate the ancient South-Arabian dialects, notably Thamūdic, Sheban, and Ḥimyaritic.
The implication of these facts is that the classical division of the so-called "Semitic Languages" into a Northern branch comprising Aramaic, Syriac and Phoenician and a Southern branch comprising Arabic, Old Yemeni, and Ethiopian is a complete fallacy. Whether this division was a result of ignorance, or a deliberate manipulation to conceal the truth remains to be seen. These dialects, in their oral form, must have existed side by side all over Arabia, even during the Biblical times. Their written form however (the various alphabets), is another matter entirely. For example, the cursive Arabic alphabet that we use today was an ingenious development of the Nabateans, around 200 AD. The Arabic language however, is immeasurably older than the Nabatean civilization, and there is no doubt whatsoever that it originated in Yemen. (In a future release, we will show you ancient Arabic inscriptions written in the Musnad scrip of South Arabia). It is therefore more correct to classify the alphabets into northern and southern branches, not the languages.
It might be difficult for you to accept this truth at this point, but eventually, the sheer amount of evidence that we will present to you will lead to only one conclusion: that the language of the Qur'ān is a sample of what may very well be the oldest dialect in existence. And it was precisely in this language that Allah revealed His final message to mankind. Arabic is a language whose alphabet was developed long after it was first spoken, and whose origins have always been shrouded in mystery.
During the time of Muḥammad (P), there were groups of people who spoke Aramaic, Syriac, and even Old Yemeni, living alongside speakers of Arabic. Until we accept this truth, we will never understand the true history of Muḥammad (P), and where he actually lived and preached. The Qur'ān describes all those other dialects as being a'jami, to distinguish them from the 'arabi tongue. Strictly speaking, the term a'jami, as is evident from various lexicons, means:
"something incomplete, imperfect, lacking, or something that struggles or makes an effort to convey a meaning; something that struggles to be complete or perfect but fails to achieve either quality". The consequences of this are quite staggering to say the least, and necessitate a complete revaluation of what the term 'arabi actually means. Although we will not elaborate on this point any further herein, it will not be long before you realize, dear reader, that the term "Arabic" (written with a capital 'A', by convention) is not the name of a particular language or nationality, but rather a description of a dialect. It is imperative that you keep this point in mind throughout our quest to recover the lost geography of the prophets.
The question still stands: Where does the so-called "Hebrew" language fit in? Let's go back to what Encyclopedia Britannica says:
"The original authors of the Old Testament are unknown; furthermore, it is not certain whether those who compiled it were individuals or groups. The Old Testament was originally recorded almost exclusively in Hebrew, with the exception of very few passages which were
recorded in Aramaic. The first Jewish community eventually translated the entire text of the
Torah (the Five Books) to Aramaic".
Do you believe this joke? Has anyone on this planet ever conclusively proven the existence of a language called "Hebrew" – a language which they claim had become "dormant" for 2,000 years before it was "revived" in the Promised Land?
Here follows is the truth of this so-called "Hebrew":
The letters you see below are Old Aramaic (also called "Paleo Aramaic"). Linguists estimate that they were used as early as the 11 th Century BC. Noting the 22 letters of this alphabet, it is obvious that they are the same letters as those of the Arabic alphabet; with the exception of 6 letters that are not found in Aramaic. The Aramaic alphabet is:
The Aramaic dialect is nothing but one of the practically extinct a'jami dialects that originated in South Arabia, then spread northwards on the waves of the ancient migrations. Eventually, several alphabets were developed as written vessels for Aramaic, and the one shown above is believed to be the oldest.
Now, take a close look at the following letters, which linguists call "Squared Aramaic":
Do they look familiar to you? These are the same letters which they call "Hebrew"; every one of them! These squared Aramaic letters are estimated to have first appeared in Mesopotamia around the 7 th or 6 th Century BC, which coincided with the era of the Babylonian Exile. This is the truth that the Zionists have been hiding all along. And whenever anyone comes close to exposing their deception, they quickly rush to the claim: "Hebrew does use the squared Aramaic letters, but it is an independent language". The fact of the matter is that there is not a single document in the entire history of the ancient world that mentions anything about a "Hebrew" language. Not even in the Old Testament itself do we find any indication or reference that the Biblical Israelites
spoke "Hebrew"! Their explanation of the absence of any mention of this language is simply that it was "dormant" for many centuries. As for the presence of hundreds of Arabic words in this so- called "Hebrew", their allegation is that, for the purpose of its "revival", it made use of many Arabic terms that were incorporated into it. [Applause and drums, please!].
The time has come to expose this global deception once and for all. What they call "Hebrew" is nothing but a mixture of Aramaic and Arabic that was injected with one of the rural dialects of Germany, known as the "Yiddish". The Zionists invented this language from scratch and came out to the world with claims of "holiness" and "originality". Aramaic, in turn, is nothing but an almost extinct dialect that originated in South Arabia, and is spoken today only in certain areas of Syria and Iraq. Being that "Hebrew" had no written form of its own, the Zionists simply hijacked the squared Aramaic alphabet and used it as a vessel for their invention.
The fact that "Hebrew" is derived from an ancient Yemeni tongue is not a new discovery.
English Orientalist David Margoliouth, who taught Arabic at the University of Oxford from 1890
until 1937, once stated: "We find, in the (Hebrew) language, especially in proper nouns, very old manifestations that match, to the letter, the scriptures of South Arabia". In his book
entitled (lit): Imagined Palestine - Land of the Torah in Ancient Yemen, (published in 2008), Iraqi scholar Fāḍel al-Rubay'i made the same observation concerning the alarming similarities between what is called "Modern Hebrew" and the phonetic patterns of the ancient South Arabian dialects. During our long journey, we will encounter and analyze many examples of these mind- boggling similarities. To give you an idea of what we mean, the Old Yemeni dialects, at one point, used the letter h (as in hair), as a definite article to mean "the". This was equivalent to the Arabic prefix article al. Hence, for example, "the year" in English is equivalent to al-sanah in Arabic, and ha-shana in Old Yemeni (the s and sh sounds often replaced each other in the old dialects). The name Rosh Hashanah, which designates a Jewish religious holiday, would be equivalent to rash ha-shanah in ancient Yemeni, which means "New Year". This term is simply an a'jami version of the Arabic ra's al-sanah. Let's take, as another example, "Haaretz", the name of the famous newspaper issued in the Zionist state. The term "aretz" is simply a corruption of arṣ, which is the ancient Yemeni term for "earth" or "land". This is because the Yemeni dialect did not have the letter ḍ (ḍād) that we find in Arabic (as in Ramaḍān), so it was replaced it with the letter ṣ (ṣād). Since the Europeans could not properly pronounce the ṣ sound, they in turn rendered it as tz (tzad). Hence, ha-aretz is simply "the earth" (or "the land"), a corruption of the ancient Yemeni pronunciation ha-arṣ, which corresponds to al-arḍ in Arabic. These are but a few examples of their so-called "divine tongue" that was taught exclusively to their "superior race".
Now, the question is: If "Hebrew" was never a language to begin with, then what does the word actually mean?
"Hebrew" - A Name or a Description?
Whenever the word "Hebrew" is mentioned today, it immediately brings to our minds a particular "nation" of people who identify themselves as being Jewish, descendants of the Children of Israel, and who consider the Old Testament to be their sacred scripture. But is this what the word really means? Or was the term given - for ideological reasons - a meaning that
was different from its original context, in order to create the illusion of a "chosen people"
racially superior to all others?
We have seen from the previous section that "Hebrew" never existed as a language in the first place, but was created from scratch by the Zionist movement in the early 20 th Century. In fact, the elderly generations of European Jews who migrated to their alleged "Promised Land" in Palestine had never even heard of this language, and were forced to learn it from their younger generations.
The truth we are about to reveal, which only a handful of people are aware of, is that the word "Hebrew" is the a'jami equivalent of the Arabic word 'ibri (singular), whose plural form is 'ibrān. This word is actually an adjective, used to describe those people who often cross over, or travel from one place to another, rarely settling down in one location. In fact, the word 'ubūr (crossing a street, river, valley, etc…) is a derivative of this word.
The implications of this matter lie in the concept of nomadic life in general. The question is:
How and when did this adjective become a term used exclusively to identify the Jews? This is another of the many forgeries which they perpetrated to hide the true identity of the Israelites. The truth of the matter is that Ibraheem (P) was described as being a "Hebrew" in certain passages of the Old Testament. At the same time, the Bible tells us that he was a wandering Aramean (meaning that he was looking for a place to settle). This is because Ibraheem migrated from his homeland and settled in the mountainous Sarāt Country. Interestingly, the Bible never uses the term "Hebrew" to describe his sons, Isma'eel and Isḥāq. Why is that so? Could it be because they didn't "cross over" with their father? Could it be because they were born in the Sarāt Country? Nowhere in the Old Testament do we read about "Isma'eel the Hebrew" or "Isḥāq the Hebrew" or even "Ya'qūb the Hebrew", for that matter. But we do read about "Yūsuf the Hebrew", for reasons that we will discuss very soon. This is a very important issue that needs to be looked into. The descendants of Ibraheem did not migrate across the Arabian wilderness to the coastal mountainous region. So, technically, they were descendants of a Hebrew, but were not Hebrews themselves. They were simply "Israelites".
The proof that the word "Hebrew" does not indicate a language or a particular national or racial identity is found within the passages of the Old Testament, for those who can read between the lines, so to speak. Take a look at the following excerpt from the Old Testament, which talks about a particular law that Mūsa (P) is claimed to have taught his people:
Now these [are] the judgments which you [O Moses] shall set before them: "If you buy a Hebrew servant, he shall serve six years; and in the seventh he shall go out free and pay nothing. "If he comes in by himself, he shall go out by himself; if he [comes in] married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master has given him a wife, and she has borne him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. But if the servant plainly says, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,' then his master shall bring him to the judges. He shall also bring him to the door, or to the doorpost, and his master shall pierce his ear with an awl; and he shall serve him forever" (Exodus 21: 2-6)
These regulations given by Mūsa to the Israelites clearly distinguish between the Israelites themselves (who, by that time, were established in their new homeland near the ancient trade routes), and the slaves, among whom were the Hebrews who migrated to the region. The Hebrews were bought and sold as slaves; something that was absolutely forbidden to the
Israelites to do among themselves. Has anyone ever heard of an Israelite (a member of "God's Chosen People") buying or selling another Israelite as a slave?
But then, why is Yusūf (P) described as being a "Hebrew" in the Bible? Wasn't he also born in the Sarāt region? This is because the inhabitants of the mountainous regions of Arabia, who had control of the entire coastal strip (including the trade routes), still considered the later generations of Israelites as being somewhat "beneath them", and looked upon them with some kind of disdain. As such, Yusūf in particular was still considered "Hebrew", even though he was born in the land that his ancestor Ibraheem had migrated to. This explains the following passage in the Old Testament:
So they set him [Joseph] a place by himself, and them by themselves, and the (Egyptians) who ate with him by themselves; because the (Egyptians) could not eat food with the Hebrews, for that [is] an abomination to the (Egyptians). (Genesis 43:32)
Pay attention to the context of the term "Egyptians" in the above text. In the original so-called "Hebrew" Bible, the word we see is Msrim. What the passage is telling us is that the Msrim could not eat food at the same table with the Hebrews. (They found the prospect repugnant because the Hebrews were looked upon as being of lower social status). The Septuagint criminals, however, perpetrated a blatant forgery by replacing the word Msrim (or msrm, as it appears in the original, silent, Aramaic text), with "Aegypto". However, that still doesn't change the context of the passage in terms of what the term "Hebrew" really means. It is clearly indicating a nomadic lifestyle, not any particular group or racial identity and certainly not designative of any one specific language or dialect.
The Children of Israel were thus descendants of Ibraheem the Hebrew ('ibri) who had crossed the wilderness of Arabia and settled in the fertile region of the Sarāt Mountains, the hub of the ancient trade routes. This region was described by Allah as being mubārakah to the inhabitants of the ancient world, because of its rich natural resources, and many fresh water streams and rivers). Ibraheem was not the only Hebrew, and certainly not the first. Anyone who migrated in this same manner was given the label of "Hebrew" by the inhabitants of the region in question. In fact, the term 'ibran is still used even today in some Arab countries, to describe the inhabitants of the rural areas (or small villages) who make the trip to the capital to conduct their business, having crossed the wilderness towards the large urban centers. It is a word that is deeply imbedded in the culture of Arabia, and provides further evidence as to where the events of the Bible took place. This is simply all there is to it.
* * * * *
He appears suddenly in the center of Arabia, to settle his "concubine" Hāgar and his infant son Isma'eel in the heart of some desolate valley. Then he leaves them there and travels back, at the ripe old age of 80, to Palestine, over 1,200 kilometers away, on foot or on the back of a donkey?? He then returns again to Arabia, crossing another 1,200 kilometers, to check up on Hāgar and his son. And again, and again, repeating the trip no less than 6 times, as the Islamic books of tradition tell us, and as Ibn Katheer reports:
رظنيو )زاجحلا لابج ءامسأ نم( ناراف دلابب هدلو مأو هدلو دقفتي تقو لك يف بهذي ملاسلاو ةلاصلا هيلع ميهاربإ ناك دقو..."
Translation: "… and Ibraheem (P) would travel repeatedly to visit his son and the mother of
his son in the Pharan country (another name they claimed belonged to the Ḥijāz mountains around present day Makkah) to check up on them."
This is what they have been teaching us for centuries about Ibraheem's multiple and mysterious journeys between the Ḥijāz and Palestine. And if we ever use our reason and contemplate these claims, we will come to the conclusion that Ibraheem traveled a distance totaling - in the least - 15,000 kilometers on foot, or on his donkey; and that's not including his original journey from Mesopotamia and his alleged foray into Egypt, which we have left out of the equation to make the calculation more simple. This means that Ibraheem's trips to and from the Ḥijāz totaled a distance exceeding the entire circumference of the planet, which measures about 12,800 km at the equator. And when any person with a single brain cell still functioning in his head asks the question of how an 80 year-old goat-herder could travel such distances across desolate wastelands and scorching deserts, and what was the purpose of repeating the trip no less than six times, that person would find the age-old answer also in the books of "Islamic" tradition, as Ibn Katheer put it:
Translation: "And it was reported that he (Ibraheem) would ride the Pegasus (winged horse) to there, and Allah knows best"
Allah knows best, indeed…
The fact of the matter is that this strange explanation puts the mind at a fork in the road. The first branch takes the reader towards accepting the story as it is, without questioning, because its source is considered "divine" and not to be doubted (Allah Said So!). And this is the road that 99.99% of Muslims, who have completely discarded their brains and logic, have taken. Or, the reader can take the second road, refuse the story outright, and sound the warning buzzard to the nations, that a great forgery was perpetrated in the account of the Patriarch. Sadly, very few people have chosen to walk this road, despite the dozens of warnings in the Qur'ān that the
Jewish priests of old had tampered with the previous messages and corrupted the biographies of the prophets - warnings which have gone unheeded for ages.
So where do we begin? And what is the solution to this puzzle?
I think the best starting point would be to ask the following question, which I am sure most Muslims have asked at some point in their lives: Why don't the Jews and Christians recognize Ibraheem's connection to Arabia? Both creeds are pretty much in agreement on the details of the Patriarch's life, from the time he was born (allegedly in Mesopotamia), to his migration to ancient Palestine (the alleged "Promised Land"), to his foray into Egypt, to the identity of his two sons (Isma'eel and Isḥāq), to the story of his expulsion of his "servant wench" Hāgar and her infant son at the behest of his wife Sarah.
Even the Muslims themselves agree with the Jews and Christians on 90% of these "facts", with the exception of some details that are really only minor issues. But there is one important episode in the life of the Patriarch that is not commonly agreed upon by the followers of the three creeds – an episode that only the Muslims recognize: the heart of Arabia, precisely southern Ḥijāz, the site of the present day city of Makkah, was an important station in Ibraheem's life.
According to the rampant "Muslim" creed, Ibraheem was indeed born in Mesopotamia, made no more than a passing visit to the heart of the Arabian Peninsula, where he "dropped off" his "wench" Hāgar, and his infant son Isma'eel in the middle of a desolate valley, left them there alone, and then went back to ancient Palestine, over 1,200 km away. Afterwards, he made repeated visits to them, year after year, to check up on them, until Isma'eel became of age, at which time he and his father (who was over 90 years old by that time) rebuilt the Sanctuary (House of Allah), which is a cubic structure located in the precise spot where the city of Makkah lies today. Finally, Ibraheem bid farewell to his son Isma'eel, who eventually became the "Father of the Arabs", and went back to Palestine (crossing another 1,200 km), to his "real" family, Sarah and her son Isḥāq, "Father of the Jews"; died there, and his tomb is located in the city of Hebron, Palestine.
This is the story that we must accept as the unquestionable truth, because "Allah Said So". Even a Muslim scientist, who holds a doctorate degree in nuclear physics, for example, believes this story, because "religion" - as he calls it - is not a domain for logic (such is their schizophrenia). The way we see it, dear reader, and with all due respect to your convictions, is that this story is nothing but a mythological fairytale that reeks of Jewish rabbinical lies, and is part of a conspiracy to hide the history of ancient Arabia, to put a big void in its place, and to project the events that took place in the Peninsula onto the surrounding lands, for purely ideological and political reasons (a lie created for political manipulation).
The next question is: Is the Old Testament - despite all the tampering that befell its texts - truly silent on the issue of Ibraheem's association with Arabia? Or is there something we are missing? Let us analyze some of the passages of the Bible and see what hidden truths can still be found underneath the pile of forgeries.
Ibraheem's Original Homeland
The Septuagint Bible details the voyage of Ibraheem (P) from the time he left the land of his fathers, which it claims was in Mesopotamia, during the Chaldean era (in the city of Ur, to be precise).
And Terah took his son Abram and his grandson Lot, the son of Haran, and his daughter-in-law Sarai, his son Abram's wife, and they went out with them from Ur of the Chaldeans to go to the land of Canaan; and they came to Haran and dwelt there (Genesis 11:31)
Then He
"I [am]
the LORD,
who brought
you out
Chaldeans, to give you this land to inherit it." (Genesis 15:7)
The above passages are among all that the Septuagint forgers needed to transfer Ibraheem's name to Mesopotamia (presently Iraq), and make him an Iraqi of the Chaldean era. So let us now ponder over this information and see if it is true, or is another one of their forgeries that they perpetrated on some moonless night, and passed onto the world.
Scholars place Abraham to have lived anywhere between 2000 BC and 1500 BC. We will assume that he lived around 1600 BC. In fact, this will later prove to be the most logical estimation, as it is in line with the number of generations that presumably passed between Ibraheem and Mūsa. And it is here that the first warning buzzard must be sounded.
When someone forges a text, they are bound to leave a clue somewhere, or to make a mistake that eventually exposes them. The question here is: What on Earth does the era of the Chaldeans have to do with the life of Ibraheem? It appears the corruptors forgot that the Chaldean dynasty began somewhere around 630 BC, after the death of the last Assyrian king, Ashurbanipal, and was ended around 539 BC, when the Persians conquered Mesopotamia. This information is known to first-year university students of ancient history. What this means is that the Chaldean era started and ended over 1,000 years after Ibraheem's time, and some 600 years after Mūsa's age. How the Hell did the so-called "Torah" - which is supposed to have been revealed to Moses, as they claim - know about the Chaldean period?
Believing this glaring anachronism is like believing the claim that Napoleon Bonaparte was
a member of King Herod's court. And they want us to applaud and play the drums to this blatant
forgery and accept is as the unquestionable truth. The evidence is so clear that only an imbecile would fail to see it. The Septuagint priests "translated" the Old Testament to the Greek language
sometime during the 4 th Century BC. They must have known the Chaldean state very well, as it was a world superpower barely 200 years before them. This scandalous claim that we encounter in the Septuagint Bible, which was eventually translated into all the languages of the modern world, has always baffled scholars and commentators, who tried to find some kind of excuse to vindicate the mention of Chaldeans associated with the era of Ibraheem (P). The only thing they could say was that the Jewish priests had perpetrated this forgery on purpose, in order for the future generations to lay claim to Mesopotamia, since the Patriarch, according to them, was born there.
In his book Myths of the Bible: How ancient Scribes Invented Biblical History (pages 115,116),
Biblical scholar Gary Greenberg states: "The Jews wanted to impose themselves as part of Mesopotamian history as a threshold towards laying claim over its entire land after the fall
of the Chaldeans at the hands of the Persians, to whom the Jewish priests were allies".
It was indeed the Jews who had assisted the Persians in their conquest of Mesopotamia, and in their toppling of the Chaldean reign. Consequently, the Persian monarch Cyrus the Great allowed them to return to their ancient homeland - which we will eventually prove was in the mountains of Yemen - and to rebuild their temple there, in the Sarāt country.
Unfortunately, the discovery of this glaring forgery in the Septuagint translation only increased the stubbornness and pride of those who wanted to defend the Jewish deception. Eventually, through their devious means of manipulation and propaganda, they passed the lie that Ibraheem was born in Mesopotamia onto all the generations of the world, until it became a matter of unquestionable belief to the members of the three "monotheistic" faiths.
To better understand how this forgery was perpetrated, we will take the same approach that we took before, when we showed you how the Septuagint liars replaced the name Msrim in the so- called "Hebrew" text with the name "Aegyptus" in their Greek translation, thus creating the illusionary association between the Israelites and Egypt, in order for the later generations of European Jews (the self-proclaimed "descendants" of the Israelites) to lay claim to the land of the Nile as part of their "Promised Land". (Remember the ideological motto carved on a plate above the entrance of the Knesset: From the Euphrates to the Nile is your land, Oh Israel!).
So let us go back to the Septuagint Bible, and compare its text with the original Aramaic version, to see what their black hands wrote to the world. The original Biblical text, written in Squared Aramaic, designates Ibraheem's ancestral home with a name that has absolutely no relation whatsoever to "Chaldea". Let's see what the text says, taking the passage in (Genesis 11:28) as an example:
׃םידשׂכ רואב ותדלומ ץראב ויבא חרת ינפ־לע ןרה תמיו
By consulting a glossary of Aramaic, we can
see that
the last
words on
the left
pronounced as such: Ur - Kasdim (or Kashdim, since the 's' and 'sh' are interchangeable in the
ancient dialects). How did the Septuagint rabbis translate this term in the Greek Bible, which became the new source of religious history for the whole world at the time? Let us take a look at the translation:
καὶ ἀπέθανεν Αρραν ἐνώπιον Θαρα τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ ἐν τῇ γῇ ،ᾗ ἐγενήθη ،ἐν τῇ χώρᾳ τῶν Χαλδαίων.
Again, looking up the last two words on the right in any Greek vocal glossary, we get: "Ur – Kaledon". Thus, the name "Ur - Kasdim" that appears in the original text became "Ur – Kaledon" in the Greek version. Do you see, dear reader, any relation whatsoever between these two words? (Remember that we are dealing with the proper name of a location, which essentially makes the word untranslatable to begin with). Furthermore, the word Kasdim is the plural form of Kasd. The ancient Yemeni dialects, like Sheban and Thamūdic, used the suffix "im" to denote the plural. This is the same rule in the so-called "Hebrew" (eloh – elohim / cherub – cherubim / katub – katubim / Msr – Msrim / etc…). This is but another example of the startling similarities between what they call "Hebrew" and those ancient Yemeni dialects. Apparently, the Septuagint "translators" replaced a plural noun, which, in the original text, indicated the name of a forgotten or unknown tribe or clan, and replaced it with the well-known and popular name of a city that was the capital of a recently toppled superpower: Chaldea. Political propaganda, anyone?
And so it was that the news of Ibraheem (P) being born in Iraq spread throughout the entire world like wildfire, carried on the wings of the Greek language, and eventually infiltrated the beliefs of the Muslims, who have been propagating this forgery and teaching it to the generations of their children for over 14 centuries.
Because the claim of Ibraheem's birthplace is so hard to digest, we can see its confusing effects well documented in the books of the Arab historians of old, who found themselves having to go to extreme lengths to vindicate and defend the ancient Jewish scribes against this scandalous forgery, by claiming the following: "Perhaps they meant Ur of Babylon!" Now this of course makes sense, since the Babylonians preceded the Chaldeans by many centuries, and coincided with the time of Ibraheem (around 1600 BC). Instead of pointing out the forgery, the Arab historians and commentators - except for a very small minority - sought to "patch it up" and defend it!
For the sake of brevity, we will not include herein actual examples of what the Arab historians wrote on the subject. But if you are an Arabic reader, you can go and look up the following references, and see the conjecture and confusion that they were caught in, concerning the birthplace of the Patriarch, which can be pretty much summed up by the allegation of "Oh, they must have meant the Ur of Babylon!":
Al-Muntaẓim, by Abu Faraj (volume 1, page 259); al-Bidāya wal-Nihāya, by Ibn Katheer (volume 1, page 140) ; al-Anas al-Jaleel, by al-'Ulaymi (volume 1, page 27).
What is even stranger is the road that Ibrahim (P) and his family allegedly took to reach Palestine. The Bible states that they had a short "transit" stop in the city of Haran. To get a clearer picture of the geographical implications of this trip, let's look at the map below, which depicts the Patriarch's imaginary journey from Ur-Caledonia (which, we remind you, didn't even exist in his time), to ancient Palestine, passing through Haran on the way (the red arrow). The map also shows his venture into Egypt (the blue arrow) where they claimed he reached the city of Memphis, just south of the Nile Delta. The green arrow shows the "extra episode" added by the Muslims exclusively, which represents his repeated voyages deep into Arabia, to the current location of Makkah in the southern Ḥijāz region (further south beyond the border of the map).
Map #2: Ibraheem's imaginary journey, according to popular belief; spanning distances that no sane mind can accept.
As can be seen from the map, the city of Ur lay at the southern end of Mesopotamia (in what is today called al-Nāsiriyyah, Iraq), near the north eastern border of Arabia; while Palestine, which they falsely call "the Land of Caanan" (we will expose to you the fallacy of that name soon), lies to the west, with the only thing separating the two regions being the southern part of the Levant wilderness. It is clear that the path from Ur to Palestine is very simple and straightforward (the black arrow); whereas Haran, their alleged transit stop, lies far far to the north of this straight path, along the ancient Syrian-Armenian border. It is hence completely out of their way.
Here follows is what the Bible says, word for word:
Now the LORD had said to Abram: "Get out of your country, from your family and from your father's house, to a land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great; and you shall be a blessing.
I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." So Abram departed as the LORD had spoken to him, and Lot went with him. And Abram [was] seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. Then Abram took Sarai his wife and Lot his brother's son, and all their possessions that they had gathered, and the people whom they had acquired in Haran, and they departed to go to the land of Canaan. So they came to the land of Canaan (Genesis 12:1-5).
The Biblical text does not give any logical reason as to why Tareh would take his family on such
a long trek. Some scholars, in their explanations, went as far as claiming that Haran was Tareh's
original hometown, and that he originally migrated south-east to Ur, so that his son, Abraham, could be born there, before striking out again in the opposite direction! In fact the only significant thing that happened in their transit stop at Haran was that Tareh died there (perhaps he couldn't bear the exhaustion from the trip anymore?), and Ibraheem then took the reins of the family, until he eventually received the "divine promise" that his progeny would inherit the land "from the Euphrates to the Nile". Others claimed that it was customary in the ancient times for people to follow rivers when travelling long distances. The direct route from Ur to Palestine, although much shorter, was inconceivable, as it passed through dry and inhospitable desert
territory. This explanation, although logical on the surface, doesn't explain why Haran in particular (the name appears as ḥrn in the original text with silent Aramaic letters) was chosen as a stop along Abraham's journey in the first place. Why not Damascus, for instance, which was a far more popular city? Something just doesn't add up, here. Furthermore, is there even a single record, in the land of Mesopotamia, from among the thousands of the Babylonian, Acadian, and Assyrian inscriptions that have been unearthed, mentioning a man named "Tareh", or his son "Ibraheem", or the name "Lūṭ", or anything about the escape of a small clan of goat-herders from Ur to a "Promised Land" far to the west?
The answer is none at all.
The Location of the "Blessed Land" - Religious Confusion
Let's see what the Qur'ān says concerning this issue:
{They said: "Did you do this to our gods, O Ibraheem?" * He said: "It was the biggest one of them here who did it, so ask them, if they do speak!" * So they turned and said to themselves: "It is indeed ourselves who have been wicked!" * Then they returned to their old ideas: "You know that they do not speak!" * He said: "Do you serve besides Allah that which does not benefit you at all nor harm you?" * "I am fed-up of you and to what you serve besides Allah! Do you not comprehend?" * They said: "If you are to do anything, then burn him, and give victory to your gods." * We said: "O fire, be cool and safe upon Ibraheem." * And
they wanted to plot against him, but We made them the losers. * And We rescued him and Lūṭ to the land which We have blessed for all peoples}…[21:62-71]
It is clear that Ibraheem (P), after a series of religious debates with the Imams of misguidance from among his people, was finally forced to migrate from there, at an advanced age. The Qur'ān also tells us that Lūṭ (a close relative of his) traveled with him initially. They left their original home and moved to a land that Allah described as "blessed for all peoples". Where exactly was that land, and how did the classical commentators understand the above passage?
If you go and open the books of history and tafseer (exegesis of the Qur'ān), you will not believe your eyes at the heap of conjecture that was put forth regarding this issue. The best summary of the confusion can be seen in the writings of al-Ṭabari, notably in his famous Tafseer al-Kabeer. Here follows is what he says (volume 17, page 47):
To summarize what is said by al-Ṭabari in the above passage, it seems that there were two feuding opinions as to where the Blessed Land was. One party was of the opinion that it was to the Ḥijāz region, the site of the present-day city of Makkah, that Ibraheem and Lūṭ were rescued by Allah; while the second party claimed that they migrated to the Levant, and that Makkah was not their permanent residence, but merely a passing stop where Ibraheem settled his concubine Hāgar and his son Isma'eel. What do we conclude from this?
1- That the ancient memory of the Arabs did in fact record Ibraheem's presence somewhere in Arabia; however, this memory was contaminated with certain alien traditions that did not come from Arabia; traditions claiming that the Patriarch migrated from Mesopotamia to the Levant (Palestine, precisely). These traditions are no doubt the source of the confusion concerning this matter. (Remember from our first book that these are the same scholars who gave the "Pharaoh" of Mūsa's age an Arabic name).
2- That al-Ṭabari, who is considered by the vast majority of Muslims, of all sects and creeds, to be the supreme authority on religious history, including the seerah (biography) of Muḥammad, could not even make up his mind, or substantiate one opinion over the other. He left the issue open to debate.
3- The tyrannical expression "there is no debate among the people of knowledge that Ibraheem and Lūṭ migrated to the Levant" pops up once again, this time in Ṭabari's exegesis. This is the same despotic allegation that appears hundreds of times in many of the books of tradition, claiming the so-called ijma' (consensus) of the alleged 'ulama (knowledgeable religious elite). The aim of this expression is to simply shut the mouths of all those who seek to doubt, enquire and ask. It is used to denote the opinion not of those who bring the logical proofs, but of those whose opinion was supported by the tyrants of their age. As for those "misguided souls" who don't agree, their ideas are usually restricted to forgotten books that sit gathering dust on the shelves of old libraries, where very few people bother to read them. It is not until hundreds or thousands of years later, when the rampant belief is proven to be false, that the old books are brought out into the light again.
It is impossible for both parties to be right concerning the location of the "Blessed Land". Either one of them is right and the other is wrong, or they are both wrong. There are still many facts that must be uncovered before we can give a definitive and objective answer to this puzzling question. However, we do respect the opinion of those "misguided souls" who defied the tyrannical ijma' by claiming that Ibraheem's ultimate destination was to the heart of Arabia, not the Levant. In reality, they are closer to the truth than they know. The question is where exactly was Ibraheem's original homeland, and where exactly in Arabia did he end up? This is what we ultimately seek to answer.
Another pressing question that Muslims have failed to provide a convincing answer to is the following: What is the logic behind the strange story that separates between Ibraheem and his family in this manner? It's as if Islamic creed requires us to believe that the Patriarch settled his original wife Sarah and his son Isḥāq in the "Blessed Land" of Palestine, then traveled a distance of over 1,200 km, across scorching deserts, with no rivers to follow, to place his "concubine" Hāgar and his other son Isma'eel in some desolate valley located in the "non-blessed" land of southern Ḥijāz. Is this another case of "Allah Said So"? Or is it due to the ancient memory and culture of Arabia being contaminated by false beliefs that have gone unchecked for ages?
It seems that the classical Arab commentators, who seemingly had no objection to using the corrupted Old Testament texts to fill what they thought were "gaps" in the Qur'ānic account, failed to pay attention to the very important clue given in the Bible itself, which completely denies any wide geographical separation between Abraham's progeny. The Old Testament account clearly tells us that when Ibraheem (P) died, both his sons took care of burying him:
And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Macphelah, which [is] before Mamre, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite (Genesis 25:9)
If the places mentioned in the above passage (Macphelah, Mamre, Ephron's field) were indeed in Palestine, how did Isma'eel end up there? Did he also travel on the back of the Pegasus from the Ḥijāz to Palestine, to participate in his father's burial? Why all this confusion?
If you contemplate the story of Ibraheem's migration from Mesopotamia to the Levant, you will find holes in it that are so large, you wonder how it even got by the classical commentators
themselves. To sum up the reasons they gave as to why the Levant is "blessed", we can state the
following example from al-Tūṣi's book entitled al-Tibyān (volume 7, page 263):
اولح اذإ اهب قلخلا عيمج عفتني يتلا تاريخلاو راجشلأا ةرثك نم اهيف امل "نيملاعلل" لاق امنإو .ماشلا ضرأ دارأ :يئابجلا لاقو
راجشلأا ةرثك نم اهيف امل :ليقو .ةكرابم تناك كلذلف ،اهنم اوثعب ءايبنلأا رثكأ نلأ ،ةكرابم اهلعج امنإو اهب
It seems that the opinion in support for the Levant as the candidate for "blessedness" relied on
two arguments to validate itself:
1- Because the Levant had an abundance of trees and resources. 2- Because it was the land where Allah had sent all the prophets to.
And it is here where we feel we must comment briefly on these conjectures:
The first reason, which states that the Levant was the land of many trees and riches (resources) was not only proven false by modern archeology (the same archeology that failed miserably to find a single trace of Sulaymān's temple in Palestine), but would also have us believe the ridiculous claim that Mesopotamia, which was the cradle of Asia's mightiest civilizations dating back 5,000 years; from the Sumerians, to the Babylonians, to the Assyrians, to the Acadians, to the Chaldeans, and whose land rivaled the Nile Valley in terms of its fertility, suddenly had no trees, and no resources to speak of! Can you believe this pile of horse manure?
As for the second reason given, which claims that the Levant was the land of the prophets; nowhere is this even remotely alluded to in the Qur'ān. It is mentioned only in the orientalist and colonial modern translations of the corrupted Jewish and Christian scriptures, which the so- called "Muslims" have followed blindly. By continuing to uphold the false belief that the Levant was the Blessed Land, and the theater of Allah's messengers, the Muslims have been marketing rabbinical Jewish merchandise for ages, without being aware of it, and without even being aware that it constitutes a screaming contradiction to their own beliefs. How the Hell can the Levant be the land of prophets, when the Qur'ān says repeatedly that Muḥammad (P) began preaching in the Mother of Towns (which they believe to be the site of present-day Makkah), and clearly tells us that all the messengers that were sent before Muḥammad lived and preached in the region surrounding the Mother of Towns?
There is something so wrong about this creed that it simply boggles the mind just how far the Muslims have gone astray on this issue. Here is the resounding truth that we repeat, and is for the Muslims to hear, before anyone else: There is not one spot of land that Allah, in His Qur'ān, described as "blessed to all peoples", from the ancient times, except the southern regions of Arabia; the land that was labeled as Arabia Felix ("Fortunate" or "Happy" Arabia) by the ancient Greeks and Romans. All the prophets mentioned in the Qur'ān, from Nūḥ (P) to Muḥammad (P) lived and died in that region, and nowhere else; period.
But the Muslims have failed to grasp this truth, as they continue reiterating their hypocritical claim that they follow the Qur'ān, when the fact is that they recite it like automatons, and are more content with "chanting it" eloquently, while swearing an oath to the shaytan not to ever contemplate the meaning of its signs. Instead, 99% of what they believe in comes from rabbinical sources that blatantly contradict Allah's Scripture. As a result, they have allowed others to write their history for them, and dictate to them who they are and where they came from. And as Julius Caesar once said: "He who does not know his history remains a child".
The Jealous Wife
Going back to the Qur'ān, we find that Ibraheem and Lūṭ left their original homeland and made their way towards a land that Allah described as "blessed to all peoples". In that land, somewhere, was a secluded and uncultivated vale, where Ibraheem settled his progeny.
{Our Rabb, I have resided of my progeny in an uncultivated valley, at your Restricted Sanctuary. My Rabb, so that they may uphold the salat. So let the
hearts of the people incline towards them and give provisions to them of the fruits
that they may give thanks}
Had those who claim to be the followers of Muḥammad's message paid close attention to the word askantu, which appears in the Arabic text of the above passage, they would have abandoned the Jewish myth that they have embraced for centuries, which tells them that Ibraheem expelled his "wench" Hāgar and her infant son. The word askantu is derived from the root skn, which carries the meaning of peaceful habitation. Hence Ibraheem settled his family there and took care of them. Does it seem more likely to you that the Patriarch left an infant child and his mother all alone in a strange and far away desert land to die of thirst, on the whims of his jealous wife? Or is it more likely that he migrated and resided with them?
While you ponder over this issue, we move on to show you where the "Muslims" get their beliefs from:
Now Sarai, Abram's wife, had borne him no [children.] And she had an (Egyptian) maidservant whose name was Hāgar. So Sarai said to Abram, "See now, the LORD has restrained me from bearing [children.] Please, go in to my maid; perhaps I shall obtain children by her." And Abram heeded the voice of Sarai. Then Sarai, Abram's wife, took Hāgar her maid, the (Egyptian), and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan. So he went in to Hāgar, and she conceived. And when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress became despised in her eyes. Then Sarai said to Abram, "My wrong [be] upon you! I gave my maid into your embrace; and when she saw that she had conceived, I became despised in her eyes. The LORD judge between you and me." So Abram said to Sarai, "Indeed your maid [is] in your hand; do to her as you please." And when Sarai dealt harshly with her, she fled from her presence. Now the Angel of the LORD found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, by the spring on the way to Shur. And He said, "Hāgar, Sarai's maid, where have you come from, and where are you going?" She said, "I am fleeing from the presence of my mistress Sarai." The Angel of the LORD said to her, "Return to your mistress, and submit yourself under her hand." Then the Angel of the LORD said to her, "I will multiply your descendants exceedingly, so that they shall not be counted for multitude." And the Angel of the LORD said to her: "Behold, you [are] with child, And you shall bear a son. You shall call his name Ishmael, Because the LORD has heard your affliction. He shall be a as a wild ass; His hand [shall be] against every man, And every man's hand against him. And he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren." (Genesis 16: 1-12)
This is how the Jews distorted Ibraheem's character; by picturing him as a weak old man, easily swayed by his wife's whims, and by picturing his son Isma'eel as the wild son; the savage son; the wild ass of a man"; the seed of a lowly maid. What is even stranger is the translation of "Msri" to "Egyptian", concerning Hāgar's identity. So the Arabs, technically, are a bastard hybrid race of half Mesopotamian half Egyptian!
Let's read on a bit more to see what other "truths" we find in the Bible:
She also said, "Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? For I have borne [him] a son in his old age." So the child grew and was weaned. And Abraham made a great feast on the same day that Isaac was weaned. And Sarah saw the son of Hāgar the (Egyptian), whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing. Therefore she said to Abraham, "Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, [namely] with Isaac." And the matter was very displeasing in Abraham's sight because of his son. But God said to Abraham, "Do not let it be displeasing in your sight because of the lad or because of your bondwoman. Whatever Sarah has said to you, listen to her voice; for in Isaac your seed shall be called. "Yet I will also make a nation of the son of the bondwoman, because he [is] your seed." So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin of water; and putting [it] on her shoulder, he gave [it] and the boy to Hāgar, and sent her away. Then she departed and
wandered in the Wilderness of Beersheba. And the water in the skin was used up, and she placed the boy under one of the shrubs. Then she went and sat down across from [him] at a distance of about a bowshot; for she said to herself, "Let me not see the death of the boy." So she sat opposite [him,] and lifted her voice and wept. And God heard the voice of the lad. Then the angel of God called to Hāgar out of heaven, and said to her, "What ails you, Hāgar? Fear not, for God has heard the voice of the lad where he [is.] "Arise, lift up the lad and hold him with your hand, for I will make him a great nation." Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water. And she went and filled the skin with water, and gave the lad a drink. (Genesis 21: 7-19)
Here we see the source of this delusion the Muslims believe in, which claims that Ibraheem cast out his "Egyptian" maid Hāgar, and left her to become lost in the wilderness with her infant son. Of course, the Qur'ān does not mention a "miraculous spring" by the name of Zamzam, nor does it mention Sarah, or Hāgar, or even insinuate that the Patriarch had two wives. Although we concur with the possibility that Ibraheem had more than one wife, to claim that the second was a "servant wench" serves the marketing of racist allegations, which insist on attributing "purity" to the Israelites (the seed of Isḥāq), while picturing the Arabs as bastard half-breeds, descendants of a wild, savage man. And the Muslims are not even aware where their beliefs originate (they
insist that their creed has not been contaminated by Jewish corruption…Oh No! Allah forbid it!
They are above such allegations!)
The Bible also tells us that Ibraheem left Hāgar and her infant son to wander alone in the wilderness of a place called "Beersheba", which, according to the Zionist and orientalist interpretation is believed to be in Palestine. This of course is the result of hijacking the geography of the prophets of Allah, and projecting it onto the Levant. The Muslims decided to make small changes in the details of the story, to make it fit more with their culture. They claimed that it was Allah who commanded Ibraheem to travel 1,200 kilometers from the Levant, drop his "wench" and infant son in a deserted valley in the southern Ḥijāz region, then travel back to a Jerusalem to rejoin his "real" family. [Applause and drums, please!]
Does this story sound convincing to you, dear reader? Would Allah command such a thing? Of course, they must have found a problem with the Jewish version of the story, which speaks of Sarah's jealousy. They must have said to themselves: "If Ibraheem wanted to keep Hāgar away from Sarah, he could have moved her to some other place in the Levant, not far from his home. So why go all the way to the heart of Arabia, over 1,200 kilometers away - a trip that would take several weeks across scorching deserts? It must be because Allah commanded it".
Going back to the previous passage in (Genesis 21), we recall the following:
So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin of water; and putting [it] on her shoulder, he gave [it] and the boy to Hāgar, and sent her away.
Then she departed and wandered in the Wilderness of Beersheba. And the water in the skin was used up, and she placed the boy under one of the shrubs.
Again, the Muslim commentators changed the details a bit, replacing the loaf of bread and water skin with a knapsack of dates and a water skin, to make the story fit better with their culture (Apparently, they believe dates are "holy"). But what about the glaring geographical absurdness itself? How did they go about solving that? Let's contemplate the story a little bit:
It has become a part of the Muslims' creed that Ibraheem cast Hāgar and her son out from his home in Palestine, and sent her deep into the heart of Arabia. And what did he equip Hāgar with for her trip, which was 1,200 kilometers long? A single water skin and a knapsack of dates ... And so Hāgar became lost in the wilderness, the distance required to consume a single water skin, and lo and behold! She found herself in a valley in the southern Ḥijāz region. Our question is: assuming, for the sake of argument, that Hāgar made the trip all by herself; how far can a woman travel, while carrying her infant son in her arms, and equipped with a single water skin? We will say anywhere between 5 and 20 kilometers. So how far was the distance between Ibraheem's tent and the valley where Allah's Sanctuary was located? Is it 5-20 kilometers as logic dictates, or 1,200 kilometers as the diseased traditions of the Muslims tell us?
In fact, this very question was asked by the ancient Arab historians, who found themselves giving various outrageous explanations for it. Some claimed that Ibraheem travelled with Hāgar from the Levant, left her near Makkah with the water skin and dates, then went back to the Levant. Or, if you want something even better, listen to what al-Suhaily says in his book entitled al-Rawḍ al-Anf (page 55):
ّنيبوّاهنيبّرجشّملاسلاّهيلعّميهاربإّمعّتنبّةراسّنأّماشلاّنمّاهيلإّاهلقنوّةكمبّليعامسإّاهنباوّرجاهّلازنإّببسّناكو ّ،رمتّدوزموّءامبّةبرقّهعمّلمتحاوّقاربلاّىلعّاهلمتحافّ،ةكمّىلإّاهبّريسيّنأّميهاربإّرمأفّ،امهنيبّامّءامسوّ،رمأّرجاه ّ .اعجارّىلوّمثّ،تيبلاّعضومّيفّةكمبّاهلزنأّىتحّاهبّراسو ّ
Here follows is a paraphrase of al-Suhaily's words (with our comments in brackets):
The reason for transporting Hāgar and her son Isma'eel from the Levant and dropping them of in Makkah (that's assuming the present-day city of Makkah even existed back then), was that a heated argument had taken place between Sarah, Ibraheem's cousin (they made him marry his cousin in order to maintain Israelite "purity" without being aware of it) and Hāgar, and so Ibraheem was ordered (note how the source of the "orders" are either unknown or of "divine" nature) to carry her on the back of the Pegasus (al-Burāq) to the location of the Bayt (the Restricted Sanctuary) then return from whence he came (i.e. to Palestine, to rejoin his wife Sarah).
These people are completely insane. There is no other explanation how a story with that many holes in it can be adopted as the truth. What we can say here is that the Pegasus (the mythological winged horse), which pops up every now and then in the "Islamic" books of tradition, is not, nor was it ever, a means of transportation, but rather a means of forgery and an insult to the intelligence of the average mind. Its purpose is to patch up a glaring geographical plot hole, to separate between Ibraheem and his progeny, and to enforce a dogmatic traditional belief that no sane mind can accept.
Picture #3: The Pegasus solves the geographical discrepancy!
The sane and logical version of the story is as follows: Ibraheem left his original homeland which was somewhere in South Arabia (by the end of this book we will have deduced its approximate whereabouts), with his wife and nephew, and migrated to the "Blessed Land", which was also in South Arabia, where he was bestowed, by Allah, two sons at an advanced age:
Isma'eel and Isḥāq (in that order). The Patriarch set up his tents in the Restricted Sanctuary. He was accompanied by Lūṭ at first, but then they parted ways shortly after they reached the Sarāt Country. Although the Qur'ān does not mention it, it is possible that Ibraheem had two wives. The second, however, was not a servant wench, and she most certainly was not Egyptian, as we will soon see.
The alternative story, which we have been fed since childhood, separates Ibraheem's family into two branches; his "Israelite" wife Sarah with her son Isḥāq located in ancient Palestine, and his "Egyptian" concubine Hāgar with her son Isma'eel residing in the Ḥijāz. To insult our intelligence even further, we read the following passage in Ibn Katheer's Tafseer (exegesis of the Qur'ān), wherein he says:
ك هن
أ رك
ذ دق
و ...امهرم
أ ي
ف رظني
و نارا
ف دلب
ب هدل
و مأ
و هدل
و دقفت
ي تق
و ل
ك ي
ف بهذ
ي ملسلا
ا هيل
ع ميهارب
إ نا
ك دق
و كان
ه ىل
إ اعير
س قار
ِ بل ِ ا ىل
ع بكر
Here follows is the translation, with our own comments in parentheses: "And Ibraheem (P)
would regularly visit his son and the mother of his son in the Pharan country (a name they
falsely attributed to the territory around Makkah) to check up on them
it was said that
he would ride the Pegasus and fly there swiftly (from Palestine), and Allah knows best".
How did such a ludicrous story become part of the Muslim belief system? It seems that in order
to reconcile between the "holiness" of Makkah on one hand, and the false creed that Palestine
was the land of the Israelite prophets on the other, it became necessary for the confused Arab
commentators to split Ibraheem's family into two branches, placing one in the Levant and the
other in Arabia.
Let us open our eyes and read, straight from the Qur'ān, the truth that exposes their false creed,
and blows their argument completely out of the water:
{And We annouced to Ibraheem the location of the Sanctuary: "Do not set up anyone with Me, and purify My Sanctuary for those who visit, and those who are standing, and the kneeling, the prostrating * And call out to the people with the Hajj they will come to you walking and on every transport, they will come from every deep enclosure * So that they may witness benefits for themselves, and mention the name of Allah in the appointed days, over what He has provided for them of the animal livestock. So eat from it and feed the needy and the poor.} [22:26-28] ...
Search you soul dear reader, as you ponder over this issue. Does it seem to you, from the above
passage, that Ibraheem, whom Allah had appointed as a guide for people, and who dedicated his
life and the life of his children to serve Allah and preserve His Sanctuary, moved back to
Palestine after having established the Deen and purified the Sanctuary? Was it not Ibraheem
who, after having spent many of the autumn years of his life at the site of the Sanctuary, thanked
Allah for blessing him with two sons at an advanced age?
{And Ibraheem said: "My Rabb, make this a peaceful country, and keep me and my sons away from serving idols * "My Rabb, they have misguided many from among the people. So, whoever follows me, then he is of me, and whoever disobeys me, then You are Forgiving, Merciful." * Our Rabb, I have of my progeny in an uncultivated valley near your Restricted Sanctuary. My Rabb, so that they may uphold the salat. So let the hearts of the people incline towards them and give provisions to them of the fruits that they may give thanks * "Our Rabb, you know what we hide and what we declare. And nothing at all is hidden from Allah
on the Earth or in the heavens * Praise be to Allah who has granted me at my old
age Isma'eel and Isḥāq; my Rabb is Hearer of the prayer}
Is there any indication, in the above passage, that Ibraheem left his son Isma'eel alone at the site
of the Sanctuary and travelled back to Palestine? Who are the sons (in plural) mentioned in the
above passage? Was Ibraheem's prayer and supplication only for Isma'eel and his progeny?
What about Isḥāq? Did he not make the Hajj to the Sanctuary? Or did he live the rest of his life
in Palestine? Until when are we going to be bound by such a ridiculous creed?
{And Our messengers came to Ibraheem with the good news, they said: "Peace" He said: "Peace," and he made no delay in bringing a roasted calf. * But when he saw that their hands did not reach for it, he mistrusted them, and he began to have fear of them. They said: "Have no fear, we have been sent to the people of Lūṭ." * And his wife was standing, so she laughed when We gave her the good news of Isḥāq, and after Isḥāq, Ya'qūb. * She said: "O my! Shall I give birth when I am an old woman, and here is my husband an old man? This is indeed a strange thing!" * They said: "Do you wonder at the decree of Allah? The mercy of Allah and blessings are upon you, O people of the Sanctuary. He is Praiseworthy, Glorious.} [11:69-73] ...
Who was the wife of Ibraheem, who laughed when she heard the tidings that she would give
birth to Isḥāq? Was it the "jealous" wife? Assuming her name was indeed Sarah, this would
mean that the visit by the divine emissaries took place in Palestine, since that's where common
Muslim belief placed her. If that's the case, then why did the emissaries salute her and her
husband as "O people of the Sanctuary"? Which Sanctuary (bayt) is being mentioned here? Is it
the one in Palestine? Have we truly been dumbed down and blinded to such an extent that we
cannot see the truth even when it is right under our noses?
Trip to Egypt?
Let us now leave Beersheba behind, and make our way towards another important stop in
Ibraheem's journey; a place called Beth-El. The name "Beth-El" is mentioned over 60 times in
the Old Testament, of which only twice in the story of Ibraheem. The first mention of Beth-El in
relation to the Patriarch's journey comes in the following passage:
Abram passed through the country into the place of Sechem, as far as the oak of Moreh. And the Canaanites were at that time in the land. And the Lord appeared to
Abram, and said to him: "To your seed will I give this land. And he built there an
altar to the Lord, who had appeared to him. And passing on from thence to a mountain, that was on the east side of Beth-El, he there pitched his tent, having Beth-El on the west, and Aai on the east; he built there also an altar to the Lord, and called upon his name. And Abram went forward, going, and proceeding on to the south. And there came a famine in the country; and Abram went down into (Egypt), to sojourn there: for the famine was very grievous in the land.…[Genesis 12: 6-10]
Some commentators, in their eagerness to prove that the "Blessed Land" is none other than the
southern Ḥijāz regions, were quick to conclude that Beth-El was indeed the House of Allah,
which they believe is the current city of Makkah. This opinion, although certainly closer to the
truth than that of the advocates of the Palestine theory, faces two problems:
1- The above passage from Genesis, in addition to other related passages mentioning Beth-El
that we will analyze later on, describe other locations in the vicinity of Beth-El that have
absolutely no relation to the geography of the Ḥijāz whatsoever, nor is there any mention of
those places in the history of the current city of Makkah.
2- If we assume, for argument's sake, that Beth-El is indeed the site of Makkah, we will soon
find ourselves caught in another dilemma, which is the presence of "Egypt" in the Septuagint
translation, which claims that Ibraheem (P) sought refuge in the Nile Valley, because there was
famine in the Blessed Land (this is the land that "flowed with milk and honey!"). According to
the text, Ibraheem left Beth-El, after having built an altar to the Lord there, and went south into
Egypt to escape the famine. Another geographical discrepancy poses itself here: how did
Ibraheem cross 1,500 km, with his sheep and goats, to reach the Nile Valley? Did he travel on
foot, or ride his donkey? Or perhaps the Pegasus flew him to the land of the Pyramids? More
importantly, how could anyone travel southward from present-day Makkah, and reach Egypt? If
Ibraheem was indeed in the Ḥijāz, and traveled south from there, he would have eventually
ended up in Yemen, on the coast of 'Ādan, and not anywhere near Egypt.
The second mention of Beth-El pertaining to Ibraheem's journey appears in the following
passages, which describe the Patriarch's return from Egypt, leading a large pack of livestock,
and his coffers laden with gold and silver, as he made his way back to Beth-El:
And Abram went up out of (Egypt), he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, from the south. And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold. And he returned by the way that he came, from the south to Beth-El, to the place where before he had pitched his tent between Bethel and Aai. In the place of the altar which he had made before; and there he called upon the name of the Lord…[Genesis 13: 1-4]
The map on the next page gives us a better picture of the distances that he would have crossed, if
Beth-El is understood to be at the present site of Makkah, and Msrim is interpreted as Egypt.
Even more preposterous than Ibraheem's alleged foray into Egypt is the Biblical explanation of
how he became rich as a result of it. Let's read the following passage from the Septuagint Bible:
And when he was near to enter into (Egypt), he said to Sarai his wife: "I know that you are a beautiful woman. And that when the Egyptians shall see you, they will say: She is his wife. And they will kill me, and keep you. Say, therefore, I pray
you, that you are my sister; that I may be well used for you, and that my soul may live for your sake". And when Abram was come into (Egypt), the (Egyptians) saw the woman that she was very beautiful. And the princes told Pharaoh, and praised her before him: and the woman was taken into the house of Pharaoh. And because of her, he was good to Abram, and he had sheep and oxen and asses, and men- servants and women-servants, and camels. But the Lord scourged Pharaoh and his house with most grievous stripes for Sarai, Abram's wife. And Pharaoh called Abram, and said to him: "What is this that you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? Why did you say, She is your sister, so that I took her as my wife? And now, behold, there is your wife! Take her, and go away. And Pharaoh gave his men orders concerning Abram: and they led him away, and his wife, and all that he had…[Genesis 12: 10-20].
Map #3: Ibraheem's trail according to the rampant Muslim belief. The roundtrip distance from Makkah to the Nile Valley and back totals 3,000 km.
Aside from the glaring Septuagint corruption which translated the name Msrim as Egypt, we
learn, from the above passage, that Ibraheem was apparently a cuckold, who sold his wife Sarah
to the "Pharaoh" of Egypt, in exchange for his own safety, and a generous gift of livestock. The
truth is that the pens of the Jewish priests wrote much worse slander about the messengers of
Allah than the heap of garbage you have just read. This is not the place however, to illustrate
with examples. What is even more outrageous is the fact that the classical commentators did not
have any reservations against using these Biblical passages to "embellish" the Qur'ānic account,
which they found to be "lacking", or incomplete, so to speak. Would Ibraheem, who was
described in the Qur'ān as the virtual father of all the messengers; the man who set an example
for humanity and dedicated his life to the service of Allah, sell his own wife to a tyrant in
exchange for worldly material gifts?
The Qur'ān describes itself as recounting to the Children of Israel the true version of the events
that were disputed among them: {This Qur'an recounts to the Children of Israel most of
that which they are in dispute over}
It also contains the best and most accurate
... accounts of the previous nations: {We recount to you (O Muḥammad) the best accounts
through what We have inspired to you in this Qur'an; and before it you were of
those who were unaware}
Allah describes the Qur'ān as being {A Book whose
It is,
according to the Almighty, a revelation that {No falsehood could enter it, presently or
afterwards; a revelation from One Most Wise, Praiseworthy}
Yet how have the so-called "Muslims" been approaching the Qur'ān throughout the ages? They
have dealt with it on the basis that it is an incomplete book that needs other sources to "explain
it". They have gone on resorting to slanderous canonical and rabbinical scriptures as means to
"interpret" the Qur'ān and "fill the gaps" in its passages. Consequently, the Deen (divine system)
decreed for them by Allah has been corrupted, and its doctrines infiltrated by countless lies and
false concepts that have become the basis for dogmatic beliefs not open to any doubt or
discussion. Meanwhile, the Qur'ān, the only available scripture capable of exposing those false
beliefs, has been rendered to no more than a book of eloquent poetry, its passages referred to as
"verses", to be recited without any reflection or understanding. As a result of this, the history of
our nation has been hijacked right from under our noses, and replaced with a twisted, orientalist
version that has been presented to us on a silver platter as the unquestionable truth.
So which of the two sides is correct then? Where exactly is the land that Allah described as
"Blessed to all Peoples"; the country to which Ibraheem migrated, and the site of the ancient
Sanctuary? Is it in Palestine, or in the Ḥijāz? Or is it elsewhere altogether?
We are very close to cracking this age-old puzzle.
* * * * *
Before revealing the details and particulars of the Biblical geography, we have to understand the
phenomenon known in Arabic as tayammun, and the role it plays in any historical or
geographical research. This phenomenon is as old as humanity itself, and will continue to exist
as long as there are humans on this Earth, and lands to explore. When populations migrate, the
first thing they do is to give the geographical features of their new territory (towns, rivers,
valleys, mountains, etc
names that were known in their original homeland. This is done to
keep an emotional link to their past, and is believed to bring good fortune (the word yumn
actually means optimism). Although this phenomenon has been unquestionably proven by
anthropologists and linguists alike, it can cause some confusion to researchers if it is not taken
into account when studying the history of past nations, due to the similarity (duplicates) it creates
in terms of names of geographic locations.
Nowhere is the phenomenon of tayammun more evident than in ancient Arabia and the Levant
regions. Plenty of evidence for this fact can be seen in the forgotten books of history written by
Arabs scholars. For example, in his book entitled Fatḥ al-Bāri, geographer and historian Ibn Ḥijr
brings to our attention the following fact concerning the name Ṣan'ā' (Volume 11, page 410):
لهأ رجاه امل نميلا ءاعنص اهيف لصلأاو . ماشلاب يتلا ءاعنص نم ازارتحا
، نميلاب ةياورلا هذه يف تديق امنإف ءاعنص امأو
."مهدلب مساب ىمسف قشمد نم ناكم يف ءاعنص لهأ لزن ماشلا حوتف دنع رمع نمز يف نميلا
To paraphrase Ibn Ḥijr, there are two places bearing the name in question: there is the famous
Ṣan'ā' of Yemen (the capital and quite possibly the oldest city in Arabia), and there is another
small rural area on the outskirts of Damascus (capital of Syria) called Ṣan'ā' as well. Ibn Ḥijr
states that during the so-called "Muslim conquest" of the Levant, under 'Umar bin al-Khaṭṭāb,
the original inhabitants who migrated from Yemen settled in that region of the suburbs of
Damascus, and gave the area the same name as their original home city.
Consequently, if news of a certain event that happened in Ṣan'ā' was being spread, it is
understandable that the first setting to come to one's mind is the capital of Yemen, because of its
popularity. But the fact is that the event could very well have taken place in the other, far less
known Ṣan'ā', which is today an area within Damascus.
Stopping briefly to study this phenomenon in our modern age, we will find that there are
countless names of cities and towns that are duplicated all across the world, especially in the
"new" continents that were the target of exploration and colonization. The following are some
1- The city of Washington, which is today the capital of the USA, was named after a small town
of the same name on the outskirts of Newcastle, England.
2- The city of New Orleans, also in the USA, was named after the old (original) Orleans in
France. Everyone in the USA knows full well that a great percentage of the inhabitants of this
city are descendants of the original settlers who had migrated from France, bringing with them
all the memories and names they held dear to their hearts, as a kind of optimism charm to start
their lives in the new continent.
3- The city of New York was also named after the original (parent) York, in England.
4- There are no less than five towns by the name of "Mecca" in North America alone!
This phenomenon encompassed not only the names of cities and towns, but also of famous
landmarks or geographical features (rivers, mountains, valleys, etc
as we will soon see.
Going back to Arabia and the Levant, we find in the phenomenon of tayammun the only
reasonable explanation for the hundreds of duplicates in the names of cities all across these
regions. And the glaring evidence is that the original name is always found to be in South Arabia
(Yemen, in particular).
There is a city called Jarash in Jordan; and there is also Jarash in Yemen. Which is the original,
and which is the tayammuni name? To answer this question, we simply need to follow the
direction of the ancient migrations. Here is what the giant Arab geographer, al-Hamādani says
about this famous Yemeni location in his book entitled (lit) Description of Arabia:
راقم يذ ميري دلو نم مهو ،ريمح فارشأ نم جساوعلا اهيف سأرتو اهنكسيو ،زنع رايد نم يهو ،ايلعلا دجن ةروك يه :شرُج
ةديعب ةيبرغ فارشأ اهلو ،عاق يف شرُجو زنع برحب مهعم نوموقي مهو مهيلإ دجن يف ةيناميلا ةباجو دوع ددؤس مهلو ،ليقلا
يقتلي مث ،ةلوكو ةمحو ةمومح ،ءادوسلا ةمكلأا ىمست ةيصان ةمومح نيبو اهنيب ،اهيقرش يف ر مي ليسم يف اههايم ردحنت اهنم
.ةشيب يداو سأر شرجف ،ناطعب ةشيب يف بصت ىتح زنع رايد ةيدوأ ليسملا اذهب
In the above passage, al-Hamadāni is describing Jarash (or Jurush, as it is commonly
pronounced) as a location containing many watery streams, that in the ancient times was settled
by the 'Awāsij (Jewish nobles of the Ḥimyaritic line). It lay at the mouth of the Beesha valley in
Northern Yemen.
There is a town called Qāna in Lebanon (where the Zionist regime perpetrated a massacre in
1996, firing missiles at a UN building harboring refugees, and killing a hundred people, mostly
women and children). But there is also a coastal city by the name of Qāna in Yemen, which
occupied an important position on the ancient trade routes. Which of these two towns is the
original and which was given the duplicate name?
For now, let us look with some detail, into the ancient and ruined city of Sūr (Tyre) in Yemen.
This ancient city has been embedded in the Arabian memory for time out of mind, as an example
of the destruction which befalls human settlements, resulting from natural catastrophes. It is
located in a province known as Mikhlāf Jayshān, south of Ṣan'ā'. Jayshān was, historically, the
greatest of the old Yemeni makhaleef (provinces or mini-kingdoms), and during the time of
Muḥammad (P), it was famous as the homeland of the Qarāmiṭa, a prestigious Yemeni clan who
were among the first to embrace Muḥammad's message. Sūr was their capital city.
In his book Description of Arabia, al-Hamadāni lists the most important locations in the mikhlāf:
بح نم نييودعلا دلب بناج و ،شيبح ينب دلب و ،ديرث و ،رضح و ،روص و ،ردب و ،رجح :ناشيج فلاخم نم دعي و
.نلاخس و
The two underlined names are: Badr and Sūr. Apparently, there was another town called Badr,
and it was located in Yemen. This name was later projected far north onto the Ḥijāz region,
where the legendary Battle of Badr allegedly took place; the battle in which the believers, led by
Muḥammad (P), recorded a decisive victory over the idolaters from among the tribe of Quraish.
The ancient Yemeni town of Sūr perished as a result of a series of volcanic eruptions which left
a permanent trace in the tribal memory of Arabia. The town, which was originally one of the
most prosperous in the Sarāt region, tragically became an example of nature's wrath, and a
subject of many ancient Arabian poems. Famous Yemeni poet, Ibn Ḥarmah, wrote the following
verse in memory of this doomed town:
روص شحو نم نيعلا نهب انيأر
امنأك ميعنلا نيع يف مئاوح
It appears that the fate of Sūr (Tyre) was a truly devastating event that shook the entire region,
and was considered the standard example by which natural destruction was measured. So tragic
was it, that it eventually became the stuff of legend. In fact, many of the classical commentators
of the Qur'an interpreted the passage: {We tested them like We tested those who owned the garden, when they swore that they will harvest it in the morning}…[17:68], as
a reminder of the fate of Tyre.
There is even a hadith attributed to the Muḥammad (P), wherein he says to 'Ali bin abi-Ṭaleb:
؟كل الله رفغ ،روص لثم ناك مث ،نهتلق اذإ تاملك كملعأ لاأ
Translation: "Shall I teach you some words you can say so that, if the example of Tyre should come to pass, Allah will forgive you?"
This hadith narration, regardless of its authenticity, is still an indicator of the trace that the
destruction of Tyre had left in the memory of the Arabs. The point is not to determine its
authenticity, but simply to point out that the Arabian tribes were very familiar with the town of
Tyre, and knew well of its terrible fate. Furthermore, this town had absolutely no relation
whatsoever with the city of Tyre located on the Mediterranean coast of Lebanon, and falsely
believed to be the very same Tyre mentioned no less than 60 times in the Old Testament.
Again, we ask the question: which of the two cities is the original Tyre, and which bears the
tayammuni name?
What about the name "Lebanon" itself? Where did that come from?
To answer the question, there is a twin-peaked mountain in Yemen called Lebynān (the dual
form of Lebn), located in the northern part of the country, not far from the Najrān Vale, and
whose summit rises to a height of over 2,000 meters. The sight of snow on the peak of Lebynān
is not uncommon during the winter months.
Here is what al-Hamadāni says in Description of Arabia (page 283) concerning this mountain:
و نايللاجلا و ناكوش :نارجن
نود راغصلا فوجلا لئاوس و نارجن يداو رارس ركذن
.نانيبل و ،ىلفسلا
In the above passage, al-Hamadāni names the best known peaks around the Vale, notably:
Shūkān, al-Jalāliyyān, Nafḥa … Lower Labākhah, and Lebynan.
Picture #4: Snow covering the highest peaks of the Sarāt Mountains
Not only was the Lebanese city of Tyre named after an older Yemeni town, but the entire
country itself, famous for its snow-covered peaks, was named after a similar mountain in the
Arabian Sarāt; another glaring example of tayammun.
The ultimate purpose of this journey is to retell the history of Arabia as it truly happened, and as
seen through the eyes of its own inhabitants, not the eyes of foreigners. Let us remove the veil
once and for all, and expose the crime of those who hijacked the geography of Allah's
messengers, including Muḥammad (P); a crime whose effects have infested the Deen for
centuries and are still evident in today's generation. Liberating the Arabian Peninsula from the
shackles of inherited delusions is the first step towards the liberation of Palestine's history from
the orientalist and imperialist narration that was imposed by the Zionist movement, starting from
the end of the 19 th Century.
Suppose that we successfully correct all the errors that were perpetrated by the Masoretic Order,
starting from the 6 th Century AD, when they began accentuating the silent letters of the original
Aramaic text of the Old Testament, by adding vowels and dialectic marks therein. Furthermore,
suppose we are successful in identifying all the elements of the older Septuagint forgery that was
perpetrated in Egypt during the 4 th Century BC, at the hands of the Jewish priests who
"translated" the Old Testament from Aramaic to Greek. What are we left with then? The answer
is quite simple: We end up with a record of events and old Arabian stories and legends whose
theater was in ancient Yemen, and not anywhere else on the planet! This is the truth that will
eventually shine forth from between the lines of the Biblical text itself. Palestine has nothing to
do with the Old Testament, in any way, shape or form. It is all a great deception that was
contrived by the orientalist imagination, with the ultimate goal of annexing Palestine and giving
credibility to their imperialist project, by finding a "divine" basis for their interpretation of the
Biblical text. In other words, the delusional connection between the Old Testament and the
Levant is a result of an orientalist deception that quite simply projected the theater of the events
surrounding the ancient Israelites onto that region.
The time has come for us Arabs to disengage our account of the region's history from the
account that has been imposed by others. Until we do so, we will find ourselves stuck in a truly
paradoxical dilemma: How can we achieve victory in our struggle over Palestine, when we have
been sharing the same false history of its territory with our enemy? For decades, we have been
reiterating the orientalist version of Palestine's history, without even giving it a second thought.
We have been teaching our children the same poisonous fraud concerning the history of our
lands, repeating it like parrots in our schools, colleges and universities; that Palestine is the
"Jewish Promised Land"; that Palestine is "The Holy Land" or "Land of the Prophets"; that the
current city of Jerusalem is the same Ur-Salem mentioned in the Old Testament; that the terms
"Jew" and "Israelite" are synonymous. We have been repeating this garbage for so long, that
even the so-called Muslim "scholars" have fallen victims to the great deception, claiming that the
1948 annexation of Palestine by Jewish pirates is a realization of an apocalyptic Qur'ānic
prophecy that Allah will eventually gather all the Children of Israel in one place! Everything that
has been taught in our educational and religious institutions concerning Palestine's history is
quite simply false. It has all been built on orientalist delusions and racist ideologies that, in their
core, are hostile to Arabs, and to the scientific and objective truth. It is truly a mind-boggling
paradox we live in. We must disengage our account from theirs, and to declare, at the top of our
voices, the shattering truth that the geography of the Old Testament has absolutely no relation to
the landscape of Palestine whatsoever. And we defy them to prove otherwise.
From the hundreds of place names mentioned in the Old Testament, fewer than 10% have
actually been identified as places within the Palestinian territory. This relatively small percentage
is due either to the phenomenon of tayammun, which we talked about previously, or because of
fraudulent projections made by the orientalist interpretation and translations of the Biblical text.
This fraud was facilitated by a vast majority of Biblical scholars, who were aided by the Zionist
war generals as well as the traffickers of ancient Palestinian artifacts, who went to great lengths
to smuggle relics of pottery, stone, or metal out of the Palestinian territory, in order to hide the
nature of these relics from the world. As for the remaining 90% of the names, no trace has ever
been found of them in Palestinian culture or history. The mismatch between the landscape being
described in the Old Testament and the geography of Palestine is a screaming reality that will
become more and more evident as we walk along the road of this journey. The Old Testament
describes towering mountains, upon which fortifications were built, none of which have been
located in the territory of Palestine. It speaks of abundant river valleys, and types of plants and
vegetation that do not, nor have they ever grown in Palestine. And even in the rare cases where
Biblical names have been naturally identified as real places in Palestine, their surrounding
geography is completely out of context with the actual landscape.
And now, after this necessary exposition on the nature of the fraud that was perpetrated in the
geography of Allah's messengers, we can return to retrace Ibraheem's journey through the
highlands of the Sarāt Country of Arabia. We will prove to you, honored reader, that Ibraheem
(P) was a legendary figure of Arabia's distant past, who lived and died in ancient Yemen, and
never set foot beyond its valleys and mountains. In this critical chapter, we will reveal
a series of "coincidences" that will expose the fallacy of the Zionist and orientalist geographical
projections, while retracing the true footsteps of the Patriarch (P) through the highlands of
Yemen, as seen through the eyes of the giant Arab geographer al-Hamadāni (died 945 AD), and
with the help of old Arabian poetry from even before the time of Muḥammad (P).
The two main Biblical locations that we will set as reference points throughout our search are
namely Beersheba and Beth-El, which were important stops in Ibraheem's journey, and which
were mentioned in passing, in the previous chapter.
Coincidences (1-20): Beer-Sheba
Let us start by going back to the controversial name "Beersheba", which today designates an area
in Southern Palestine (according to the orientalist projections), despite the utter failure of
archeologists to find any shred of proof that the place had a connection to Ibraheem (P). The
name is mentioned over 30 times in the Old Testament, beginning with the passage in (Genesis
21), that we discussed earlier. It is worth noting that in some translations of the OT (Noah
Webster Bible, American Standard Version), the name appears in the compound form "Beer-
Sheba" - which is in fact more accurate and reflective of the original Aramaic text - while in
other translations it is rendered as "Beersheba". In any case, the word "beer" means "well" (the
Arabic form is bi'r)
When archeologists excavated the land of Palestine for the first time, the oldest well they found
in Beersheba belonged to the Iron Age (around 700 BC), and had absolutely no relation to
Ibraheem whatsoever. The well was dug with iron tools, and reached a depth of 40 meters, after
which it ended before reaching any underground water. It is completely out of the question that
the well existed during Ibraheem's day and age.
It is worth noting that the Arabic translations of the OT have rendered the name as Bi'r al-Sabe',
which can mean either "Well of the Seven" or "Well of the Wild Beast". This translation is
actually inaccurate, as it assumes that the original "Hebrew" name had the pronoun article ha,
which is not the case. (The Arabic translation would be correct had the "Hebrew" name been
Beer ha-Sheb'). Some Arab academics and experts in the field of linguistics, notably Kamāl
Ṣaleebi, Farajallah Deeb, and Ziād Minah - despite their different opinions regarding the actual
location of the place - agreed concerning the inaccuracy of the Arabic translation of the name,
and indicated that the correct rendering of the name must be Bi'r Shab' or Bi'r Shabbā'ah
(meaning: Well of Fullness).
Bearing in mind the names of other Biblical locations in the vicinity of Beer-Sheba, of which not
one trace was found in Palestine on the one hand, while analyzing the staggering similarities
between the Biblical passages and the entries in al-Hamadāni's book Description of Arabia
(DoA) on the other, we were finally able to locate the place in the highlands of Yemen. In fact,
talking about Bi'r Shabbā'ah, will automatically lead us to the ancestral homes of one of the
twelve tribes of Israel, the Tribe of Simeon. The ancient Yemeni prophet Yūsha' (Joshua)
designated the following areas as the residence of Simeon, within the greater territory of Judah:
And the second heritage came out for the clan of Simeon by their families; and their heritage was in the middle of the heritage of the children of Judah. And they had for their inheritance Beersheba, and Sema, and Moladah. And Hazar-Shual and Balah and Azem. And Eltolad and Betul and Hormah. And Ziklag and Beth- Marcaboth and Hazar-Susah. And Beth-Lebaoth and Sharuhen; thirteen towns with
their unwalled places
(Joshua 19: 1-6).
Before we pinpoint the exact location of the places mentioned in the above passage, a brief word
is in order regarding the distribution of territories among the Israelite tribes. In many instances,
we find the tribal homes overlapping in certain areas, as is the case, for example, with the
biblical location of "Hormah", which was, at the same time, a part of the territory of the great
Tribe of Judah. This in fact takes us back deep into the history of Arabia, to ages where some
tribes found themselves sharing certain territories, while bearing the exclusive rights to others.
This territorial system was known as the ḥuqūq (meaning: the rights). For example, in the books
of the Arab geographers of old, we find the ḥuqūq of clan Tameem overlapping with the ḥuqūq
of clan of Ṭa'i. What is interesting, as we will see later on, is that this exact same expression, ḥqq
(as it appears in the original, silent Aramaic text), is encountered in the Book of Joshua. The
orientalists, who obviously didn't understand the significance of this term, interpreted it as being
the actual name of a location! The truth of the matter is that neither Palestine, nor Arabia, nor
any other corner in the entire world for that matter, ever knew a place by the name of Ḥuqūq.
Bearing this important point in mind, we can now move on to point out the actual location of the
Biblical Beer-Sheba, as well as the other places in its vicinity. Here follows then are the areas
comprising the territory of the Tribe of Simeon, as designated by Joshua.
1) Beer-Sheba:
Al-Hamadāni mentions this place by the name Bi'r Shabbā', and places it within the area known
today as Kareef Radā' (formerly Mikhlāf Radā'), a region of ancient fortifications and water
canals located in the vestiges of Wihāẓah, which, sometime during Yemen's past, was referred to
as Shabbā'. The area is in the north-western corner of the province of Ibb. The ancient, ruined
fort of Wihāẓah is located in a high, mountainous region, marked by the presence of several
shallow wells, among them the well of Shabbā'.
Take a look at the following passage in al-Hamadāni's Description of Arabia