Bismika Alllahuma

Foi sempre a tradição do missionário a saltar de uma reivindicação nefarious a outra em tentar verificar a natureza de “Allah”. Nós temos mostrado previamente algumas das teorias mais comuns que propagam, variando de Allah (T) que é da “o deus lua” a Ar-Rahman sendo um termo para o “pomegranate”. Um allegation recente do missionário também hurled de encontro a um salutation beatific do Prophet Muhammad sallam do wa do alayhi do `do sallallah. Um postulation novo do missionário tem sido feito agora dentro seu artigo, a saber que “Allah” é synonymous com o deus Hubal do Makkans pagan!

Talvez seria uma idéia boa introduzir o leitor a primeiramente explica como o idolatry no árabe pre-Islamic foi praticado:

Cada tribe teve um idol diferente que adorasse. Geralmente, os objetos da adoração pertenceram a três genres: metal e estátuas de madeira, estátuas de pedra, e massas shapeless da pedra que um tribe ou outro consecrated porque sua origem foi pensada para ser heavenly, visto que na realidade era somente uma parte de rocha vulcânica ou meteoric.¹

Daqui reconhece-se que cada tribe árabe teve seus próprios “idol principal” a qual adoraria. No que diz respeito à posição de Hubal, anota-se isso:

Hubal era o membro o mais grande do pantheon árabe e residido em Makkah, dentro bah do Ka'. Os Pilgrims vieram a seu shrine de todos os cantos.²

A respeito da natureza de Hubal, verificou-se tradicional que o idol é Moabite na origem. Estados dos Lings de Martin como segue:

Assim o al-Muttalib de Abd do `continuou a escavar sem nenhum movimento real que está sendo feito para pará-lo; e alguns dos povos deixavam já o sanctuary quando de repente golpeou o covering de pedra do poço e expressou um grito de thanksgiving ao deus. A multidão remontada e aumentada; e quando começou a escavar para fora o tesouro que Jurhum tinha enterrado lá, todos reivindicou a direita compartilhar nele. O al-Muttalib de Abd do `concordou que os lotes devem ser moldados para cada objeto, a respeito de se deve ser mantido no sanctuary ou lhe ir pessoalmente ou ser dividido amongst o tribe. This had become the recognised way of deciding an issue of doubt, and it was done by means of divining arrows inside the Ka’bah, in front of the Moabite idol Hubal…³

Hence it has always been known that the idol Hubal is a Moabite import (i.e. Baal), hence demolishing another of the missionary’s accusations. Hitti seems to concur with the Moabite origins of Hubal by stating that:

Hubal (from Aram. for vapour, spirit), evidently the chief deity of al-Ka’bah, was represented in human form. Beside him stood ritual arrows used for divination by the soothsayer (kahin, from Aramaic) who drew lots by means of them. The tradition in ibn-Hisham, which makes ‘Amr ibn-Luhayy the importer of this idol from Moab or Mesopotamia, may have a kernel of truth in so far as it retains a memory of the Aramaic origin of the deity. At the conquest of Makkah by Muhammad Hubal shared the lot of the other idols and was destroyed.⁴

How was this postulated to be the one and the same with Allah is no doubt a mystery that only the missionaries are capable of understanding. Further, it is also admitted by Hitti that Hubal shared the fate of the other idols which were destroyed at the conquest of Makkah.

Hence it is clear that there is nothing in the missionary diatribe that “seriously damages the Muslim claim regarding Allah in pre-Islamic times being the same God of Abraham” nor does the missionary reliance on Psalms and circular reasoning is “evidence linking Allah with Hubal”. As we have already noted before, Hubal was the principal idol of the Quraysh, as was Al-Lat the principle idol of the Ta’ifans. Despite their declination into idolatry, it is amazing, as one scholar remarks⁵, that the Quraysh have never lost sight of Allah as the Supreme Lord of the Universe. What is obviously clear from the evidence we have presented is that it is the worship of Hubal that was later imported into the present beliefs of the Makkans who had earlier already acknowledged the existence of Allah as the Only God. Indeed, Islam has identified itself with the other Semitic religions (Judaism and Christianity) and called upon them in these words:

“Say [O Prophet]: ‘O People of the Book! Let us come together on a fair and noble principle common to both of us, never to worship or serve aught but God, never to associate any other being with Him, and never to take one another as Lords besides God.” (Qur’an, 3:64)

This is indeed the religio naturalis of which Islam asserts as first principle that all mankind are endowned with this innate religiousity.

As for the rest of the inconsequential polemic of the missionary which deals with the ephitet Ar-Rahman and digressed from the nature of Hubal in pre-Islamic Arab consciousness, an exposition of this term may be seen here.

It is interesting to note that despite the propagation of this ridiculous theory that Allah = Hubal, the missionary still feel it fit to put up the following “disclaimer” in his Addendum section:

Hence, even if the Quranic mention of Baal turns out to be a reference to Hubal, this would only show that Muhammad disassociated Allah from Hubal by turning the former into the true universal God.

It is an obvious escape tactic for someone who was never sure about the “position” of Hubal in the worship of pre-Islamic consciousness and wanted to leave the back door open if anything “disastrous” happens to the theory he propagates. Well, the disaster has certainly arrived!

And only Allah(T) knows best, for only He alone is worthy of worship.

1. M.H. Haykal, The Life of Muhammad (transl. Isma’il R. al Faruqi), p. 20 [back]
2. Haykal, ibid. [back]
3. Martin Lings, Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources, p. 11 [back]
4. Philip K. Hitti, History of the Arabs, p. 100 [back]
5. Refer to M. Mohar Ali, Sirat al-Nabi and the Orientalists, Vol. 1A, p. 74 for the full discussion. [back]