Saturday, December 5, 2020

Sam Shamoun "THE RELIGION OF ISLAM: THE REEMERGENCE OF BAAL WORSHIP" (1)



The Arabs were traders and they brought back all sorts of gods as time developed, in order to attract foreign tribes to their city, forming alliances with them. It is this introduction of idolatry which is the essential criminal act the Quran accuses them of in regards to the Kaaba.

One such major deity imported was Hubal. It was inserted among countless other deities, mainly playing the role of intercessors with Allah 46:28,39:3. As attested throughout the Quran and the traditions, Allah was the supreme God whom all Arabs recognized as the Almighty Creator, including the Hanif and both Arab Christians and Jews before the advent of Islam. Although the Quran denounces the religion of the polytheists, even names some of their prominent idols, it never does so on the basis of them supplanting Allah, the supreme God they recognized, with other more powerful or authorative deities. Rather the condemnation always is in terms of associating partners to Him in the dominion, as well as ascribing a progeny to Him. 

There is abundant evidence in pre-islamic poetry depicting Allah as the Creator of the heavens, involved in human lives, sustaining them and inflicting retribution. A famous pre-islamic poem attributed to 'Adi ibn Zayd swears by 
"Rabbi makkata wal salibi/The Lord of Mecca and of the cross".
 It is well known that pre-Islamic Arabs, including pagans, Christians or Jews, referred to God with Allah, as well as Rabb/Lord. Several poets call the Kaaba the 
"House of Allah" (ibn Shihab, ibn al Hudadiya, ibn al Khatim). 
Not only that, there are poems associating pilgrimage rites, including sacrifice at the site with veneration to Allah (al Nabigha, al A'sha). Ibn Ishaq reports how in pre-islamic times, the prophet's grandfather made a vow of sacrifice to Allah whom he recognized as the Almighty. The sacrifice was eventually brought at the Kaaba, to Hubal, the interceding deity among many, next to whom the prophet's grandfather stood. But instead of addressing Hubal in prayer Abd al-Muttalib 
"was standing near Hubal praying to Allah". 
As stated earlier, among the gods brought to Mecca, serving the function of partners of Allah was Hubal. Tradition asserts he was brought in from outside the Arabian Peninsula, either from Syria or Iraq by Amr bin Luhayy 
"0 'Amr! you have invented various gods; At Mecca - idols around the House. And there was for the House One Lord from ever; But you have made for it several lords (which are now worshipped) by the people. Surely you should know that Allah is in no hurry; Soon He will choose for (His) House stewards other than you". 
Although the People protested originally to the innovations of Amr bin Luhayy, they were quickly curtailed. One may give these pre-islamic Arabs the benefit of the doubt for their leniency in religious innovations. They cannot be compared in that sense to the Israelites who were sent countless prophets and shown numerous miracles, even during the time of Manasseh where idols had been placed within the Temple, and yet still refused listening. With their Ishmaelites brethren, however, it only took a fraction of what their predecessors were shown from proofs, and it was enough to eradicate the corruption grafted into the religion of Abraham once and for all. This shows how deeply ingrained monotheism and the Abrahamic legacy was, in the hearts and minds of the Arabs, despite the passage of time and the religious innovations. Thus even a minute of straying by the Israelites is equivalent to 1000 years of deviation by the Ishmaelites at their own temple of the one God in Mecca. 

In the course of time, worshiping the transcendent Allah became difficult for the increasingly idolatrous Arabs. By the time of the prophet, although they still majoritarly recognized the superiority of Allah above all their interceding idols, many others had abandoned the worship of Allah altogether. The lack of representation of the supreme Allah among a myriad of statues and images proved too challenging to the shallow spirituality and primitive mindset of some of the ancients. This is seen in Abu Sufyan, the Quraysh chieftain and early enemy of the prophet, taunting the defeated Muslims at the battle of Uhud
 "Superior may be Hubal!" On that the Prophet said (to his companions), "Reply to him." They asked, "What may we say?" He said, "Say: Allah is More Elevated and More Majestic!" Abu Sufyan said, "We have (the idol) Al-`Uzza, whereas you have no `Uzza!" The Prophet said (to his companions), "Reply to him." They said, "What may we say?" The Prophet said, "Say: Allah is our Helper and you have no helper." Abu Sufyan said, "(This) day compensates for our loss at Badr and (in) the battle (the victory) is always undecided and shared in turns by the belligerents". 
The hadith is longer but what transpires is that at no point does Abu Sufyan negate the prophet's declaration that Allah is the superior Deity. He knew that Hubal was only an intercessor with Allah. Hence instead of reaffirming Hubal's superiority in answer to the prophet, he boasts that contrary to the Muslims, he has more gods in support. Ibn Abbas, as quoted by the historians including ibn Hisham, relates other parts of the exchanges that occurred on that same occasion. When Abu Sufyan called out the besieged Muslims and that Umar answered, Abu Sufyan asked him 
“By Allah o ‘umar! Did we not kill Muhammad?” 
Umar answered back, 
“By Allah, you did not. He can hear you speaking now". 
Abu Sufyan, on that same occasion where he taunted the Muslims with Hubal's superiority, still swears by Allah. He was an example of Arabs that knew of Allah's position but had abandoned worshiping him in favor of more "trending" and physically tangible deities. That even people like Abu Sufyan never denied Allah's superiority is seen at his time of conversion, stating that 
"By Allah, I thought that had there been any ilah/deity with Allah, he would have continued to help me". 
As he regretfully remembers his time as a pagan, he doesnt blame himself for not believing in Allah, or for doubting His superiority, but for ascribing partners to Him. This was exactly the Quran's reproach towards these Ishmaelites.
 
Allah was never an idol within the Kaaba, the Kaaba was dedicated to Him. The accumulation and piling up of idols above idols was due to the complacency and unrestrictedness that the Meccans and the custodians of the Kaaba felt as time went on. It was due to their neglect of the Kaaba's original dedication to Allah alone. The Quraysh would argue, that had their innovations been harmful to the worship of Allah then Allah Himself would have prevented them and their forefathers from doing so 
16:35,6:148"Those who are polytheists will say: 'Had Allah wished we would not have associated (aught with Him) nor our fathers, nor would we have forbidden anything.' So did belie those who were before them until they tasted Our punishment. Say: 'Have you any knowledge with you to adduce for Us? You follow nothing but conjecture, and you are nothing but idle talkers'". 
This shows they did have a tinge of guilt towards their innovations, which they brushed off as divinely approved because Allah did not punish them for it. This type of determinism is rejected in religion, and disregards that God's disapproval has and does manifest itself. They knew it themselves that nations prior to them and mightier were wiped out on account of such sins. Prophets and revelations were sent to these nations clarifying the right and the wrong, just as was happening now with them 
6:149-151"Then to Allah (alone) belongs the conclusive argument. Had He wished, He would have surely guided you all aright...Say: 'Come, I will recite what your Lord has forbidden you from: that you do not associate anything with Him, and show kindness to your parents, and do not kill your children for poverty -We provide for you and for them - and do not approach indecencies, the outward among them and the inward ones, and do not kill the soul that Allah has forbidden save for justice. This He has enjoined you with so that you might understand. And do not approach the property of the orphan except in the best manner until he attains his maturity, and give full measure and weight with justice-- We do not impose on any soul a duty except to the extent of its ability; and when you speak, then be just though it be (against) a relative, and fulfill Allah´s covenant; this He has enjoined you with that you may be mindful; And (know) that this is My path, the right one therefore follow it, and follow not (other) ways, for they will lead you away from His way; this He has enjoined you with that you may guard (against evil)".

As to Hubal, the place from where it was brought from is uncertain, although all Muslim authorities of the past are united in that its origin is foreign. As already discussed, it was fairly common in those ancient times for ideologies and religious beliefs to be exchanged through migrations and travels, as well as economic interests. We see this in our own times with people selling their inherited traditions and beliefs, customs and values for the sake of opening up businesses, political or other interests. The corrupt and materialistic custodians of the Kaaba were no different. They desired to attract as many far away people as they could, from every religious background as possible, to the yearly pilgrimage, even putting portraits of Jesus and Mary on the Kaaba's wall according to tradition. 

The Arabian peninsula was known for gold, copper and silver mines even prior to Islam, which allowed Arab merchants to travel and be well-suited middle-men. Gold is present, the archaelogical evidences for mines is present and these mines are being accessed today. Serious mining began 3000 years ago. More than 1000 ancient mines were uncovered, besides those that were lost to bigger mining projects upon the same grounds. Vast reserves are still awaiting extraction. Biblical scholars even argue that the Cradle of Gold in the creation account might be located in the Mahd adh-Dhahab area of the Hijaz, between Mecca and Medina. Scholars argue this might also be the true location of the legendary mines of king Solomon, given the huge quantities of waste rock, an estimated million tons, left by the ancient miners, still containing traces of gold today. No other ancient region could have supplied Solomon as described in the Bible. The mine is even still in activity today. Scholars today argue, following the same principle of religious exchanges, and with archaelogical evidence in support, that the Egyptian deity Hathor although a central worship figure was not originally Egyptian, but a Semitic goddess who was Egyptianized. She is believed to have been imported by Semitic turquoise miners in the Sinai, who came from Canaan.

Hubal's "foreign" origin is partly the reason why he was not integrated into the "divine family" of Allah unlike the three "daughters of Allah", Allat, Manat and al-Uzza mentioned in the Quran. Thats also why Hubal never supplants Allah as the lord of the Kaaba. The cult associated with him involved divination and future forecasts. The custodian of the idol acted as the oracle. He requested blood sacrifice followed by a consultation of the divination arrows lying in front of him. 

The Quran does not speak of Hubal, just as it doesnt mention the other deities of the Arab pantheon, except for al-lat, Manat and al-Uzza. These were specifically pointed because of their feminine gender, serving as an argument against the misogynistic pagans who, paradoxically, were not only worshiping females, but also gave them a status of influence alongside Allah, the supreme deity 53:19-23. Their paradoxical misogyny lied in the fact that they worshipped goddesses and yet murdered their infants if they were females.

Some polemicists have tried levelling a strange claim, that Hubal is the Arabic for the Hebrew HaBaal "the Baal", the moabite deity and was the original name of Allah. This, as is always the case with these kinds of grandiose speculations, does not agree with the evidence at hand. The idea of Ha-Baal becoming Hubal is first and foremost bellied by the Quran which is very well aware of who that Baal deity was. It has preserved its original name, written and pronounced in an utterly different manner than Hubal. It has a different root, and is mentioned in the context of the prophet Elias' confrontation with his people, urging them to forsake Baal and return to worshiping Allah the true and unique God 37:123-132. So was it speaking of leaving Ha-Baal for Hubal/Allah? In addition to preserving the name of Baal, the Quran also separates between it and Allah. 

The linguistic acrobatics used in order to demonstrate the transformation of Ha-Baal (with ayn/3) into Hubal is equally untenable in light of archeological evidence. For the name b3l to become bl with the loss of ayn, it would have to have been transmitted through a language such as Akkadian or Punic in which the ayn had disappeared. These languages however do not use the Ancient North Arabian definite article h-. On the other hand, the Ancient North Arabian dialects using the definite article h- or hn- never dropped the ayn/3. The polemic here therefore consists in criss crossing between different languages and create an inexistant one where all the convenient rules are united.

Even the pre-Islamic beliefs surrounding Allah, and the mythology around Baal have virtually nothing in common. For example the depiction of Allah's family by the Arabs obviously doesnt agree with the beliefs on Baal's family. Baal had a father, mother, brothers, sisters and son, as well as various helpers and messengers. He in addition was, just as trinitarians believe concerning the divine son/father relation, under the authority of the deity "'Il". The lesser deities were in competition among one another to attract the favors of 'IL, as only he could appoint kings, such as Baal, among the lesser deities. Further, the epithets of Baal discovered at Ras Shamra (modern day northern Syria) describing the beliefs concerning the Ugaritic deities, do not even remotely resemble those of the pre-Islamic Arabs regarding Allah. 

We have historical sources like those quoted earlier, distinguishing between Hubal and Allah, with some pagans depicted in battle as calling upon Hubal and Allah's daughters (the ones believed to influence the decisions of Allah, the supreme God), while the Muslims replied by invoking Allah's name alone, as the Almighty and sole Helper. Abu Sufyan, who is talked about as calling upon Hubal, would later come to the fact that
 "By Allah, I thought that had there been any god with Allah, he would have continued to help me". 
He accepted Allah as the one, supreme God beside whom there exists no other god. Why didnt Hubal survive as an epithet of Allah, if Hubal and Allah had been one and the same deity?

No comments:

Post a Comment