The Anvil of Truth

Tuesday, December 15, 2020

Sam Shamoun "A “Prophet” for Profit: More of Muhammad’s Inconsistencies Exposed" (3)

Sura Tawba stipulated that all idolators were forbidden custody and entry to the precincts of the Sacred Mosque after its restauration to its original purpose, as instituted by Abraham, of being the prime symbol of monotheism for all visitors 9:17-22.

With their sacraligious practices 8:34-5 which had disfigured the legacy of Ibrahim and Ismail, they had become spiritualy unclean 9:28 and unworthy of being the custodians of the sacred house, let alone perform their idolatrous rituals in it.

They could not claim legitimacy over the House of God instead of the righteous monotheists such as the hanif remnants who had tried preserving the way of their father Ibrahim. The pagan Ishmaelites could not claim authority over the Kaaba for the sole reason that they inherited it and maintained it

"do you make (one who undertakes) the giving of drink to the pilgrims and the guarding of the Sacred Mosque like him who believes in Allah and the latter day and strives hard in Allah's way? They are not equal with Allah; and Allah does not guide the unjust people".

They were unclean spiritually because of their sins, just like the hypocrites are said to be unclean 9:95 and like the sinful nations who had to be uprooted by the Israelites under divine order from a land declared sacred by God Deut9. This principle would ironicaly later on be applied upon the Israelites themselves. Under Ahab's rule they progressively returned to idol worship. King Jehu later massacred them as he tried erradicating the land from Baal worship, tearing down pagan temples 2Kings10.

As regards to Quranic principle of spiritual uncleanness of the sinners, it is a concept present throughout the Bible too.

The Sacred House dedicated to the worship of the One God since its raising by Ibrahim and his son Ismail, could not remain therefore in the custody of the spiritual degenerate and those that corrupted its purpose, because their authority over it and their divine protection 105:1-5 was granted conditionaly to the keeping of the way of Ibrahim 106:1-4. Just as the the Jews had to be removed from their control over God's temple once they reverted to their sinful ways, now the Ishmaelites, because of their failure, the Kaaba had now to be cleansed from all traces of polytheism and return to its monotheistic purpose, in answer to Ibrahim's prayers, until the Day of Resurrection 2:125-130. The Quran would admonish the Quraysh indirectly for following the erring ways of their forefathers and failing to maintain the Kaaba's purpose, through the story of Ibrahim whom they prouded themselves to be the direct descendants of.

This ordinance, the banning of idolaters from practicing their religion in the sacred precincts of the Kaaba, had naturally disturbed those among the Muslims whose entire livelihood depended on trade during the pilgrimage season 9:28. This meant the town would lose its position as a comercial center and most trade would cease. However these worldly considerations could not interfer with the carrying out of higher objectives and further

"if you fear poverty then Allah will enrich you out of His grace if He please; surely Allah is Knowing Wise".

That enrichment came as the entire land of Arabia entered the fold of Islam like waves upon waves as prophecied in a time when none could have imagined for such an outcome to come true 110:1-3. Trade resumed ever since, on a scale they would have never fathomed, and the Meccans regained their prestige in the region and beyond.

The jizya, which some critics argue was meant at counterbalancing the loss of trade, isnt what caused that "enrichment", neither back in the time of the prophet nor in our times. How is the jizya relevant today in "enriching" the Muslims of Mecca or Medina? Jizya did not fill the private pockets of Meccan businessmen, nor financed private projects, neither in the past nor today. It was the prerogative of the government, used in exchange of concrete state services and exemptions as will be shown below. The caliph Umar, towards the end of his life urged to

"abide by the rules and regulations concerning the Dhimmis of Allah and His Apostle, to fulfill their contracts completely and fight for them and not to tax them beyond their capabilities".

He added elsewhere

"as it is the Dhimma/covenant/protection of your Prophet and the source of the livelihood of your dependents".

So there clearly is an exchange in benefits. The Muslim governement is to fight and protect those with whom it made a covenant. This is just one among the many services enjoyed by the people of dhimma, as will be shown below. They in exchange compensate the Muslims for their sacrifices and services, without being overburdened financially. This is nothing unusual under any modern day government.

Sam Shamoun "A “Prophet” for Profit: More of Muhammad’s Inconsistencies Exposed" (2)

The misinformed critics arguing that jizya was an unfair system aimed at enriching the Muslim state may be thinking of the divinely blessed taxation and hoarding of riches and spoils by king David and his appointed governors in his conquests. This wealth was dedicated to the building of national religious edifices (on the ruins of other people's) 2Sam8,1Chr18:2,6,8,13,20:1-2,26;26-7 and meant for personal glory as well 2Sam12:29-31. The wise king and prophet Solomon would continue in this pattern, in line with the rules of the monarchy dictating that the king's expenditures (a "heavy yoke" that ultimately caused the scission of the kingdom of Israel after Solomon's death 1Kings12) should be collected indiscriminately, contrary to the jizya that spares the needy and weak 1Sam8:11 (some exemples of the daily rights, gifts and luxuries of the Jewish monarch to be brought forth by conquered nations in 1Kings5:1-7,9:14-15,27-28,2Chr27:5). Solomon similarily to David had appointed representents that collected his levy from Jews and non-Jews, the difference between the 2 groups being that when the conquered nations could not pay they were reduced to forced labor 1Kings9:21. Contrary to this subduing system aimed at benefiting a party and lowering another, going back to the days of Joshua (Josh16:10) and before, jizya partly financed the functioning of a society in which those who paid it were fully part of.

In the HB and as corroborated by Jesus in the NT when he said to abide by it to the minute details, several types of wars are promulgated. There is the compulsory command/mitzva among the 613 revealed at Sinai, binding on Jews of all times to destroy Amalek's seed Deut25:19 without showing any pity whenever the opportunity is there, and exterminate the remaining Canaanite nations from the land of Israel whenever any of them or their descendants are identified Deut20:16.

This is a timeless ordinance, as already said, part of the 613 binding commandements, and is thus an explicit order to genetically exterminate a certain people. Every command within the Torah is understood as eternally binding and those that are inapplicable today due to the absence of a Temple will be reinstated in the utopian messianic era, where every nation will be forcefully subdued to the Jewish God. The eternally binding command to blot out Amalek's seed and other Canaanites, if one fails acting upon this law anytime a descendant of such tribes is genetically identified, then one becomes subject to divine anger as what happened to king Saul 1Sam28:18,1Chr10. Saul suffered a violent and dishonourable death. His household was decimated at the hands of the Philistines who also dispossessed his community.

The same happened prior to the entire Israelite community that was sent for a 40 years desert wandering for their refusal to engage the promised land's natives in battle. Along with those known, compulsory genocidal warfare as described earlier, during which no atrocities towards men, women, children, cattle and plants may be spared, there are laws relating to optional warfare, for the sole purpose of Israel's "national glory" as labelled by their rabbis. In such cases any random nation the Israelites arbitrarily choose, and set themselves out to conquer can either be "peacefully" submitted, resulting in the enslavement and taxation of its population, or in case of their rejection of the "peace offer", a military subjugation resulting with the execution of all adult males, the capture as spoils of war of their women, children, and livestock

Deut20:10-14"When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies. This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby".

In addition, should it be necessary to completely subdue that nation

2Kings3:19"you shall fell every good tree, and you shall stop up all springs of water, and you shall clutter every good field with stones".

In the land of Canaan, those natives that werent driven out or exterminated as per the Torah's injunctions during the invasion, were subdued into slavery Josh17:13. Their descendants suffered the same fate under Solomon's rule 1Kings9:20-1. After all and as stated in both the HB and the Talmudic writings, the purpose of creation and the reason why the heavens and earth are maintained is for the chosen race to observe Torah. The idea finds root in the cataclysmic event of the uprooted mountain and Israel's entering into the divine covenant. The rabbis have linked the tradition to Psalm 76:9. The earth initially feared it would return to its pre-creation state, and only after Israel accepted the Torah did the earth continue existing. Since the whole universe depends on Torah's acceptance God could not risk a negative outcome and had to force it upon the Israelites with a death threat. The Talmudic worldview is thus established, placing God, Israel, and Torah at the center.

All these citations werent made to disparage the Bible, rather at pointing what would have been the outcome had the Quran been the product of human base desires, whims, greed and lust. The fact is the Ishmaelites went through almost identical situations as the Israelites in their confrontations with opposing tribes and nations, and yet we do not find anything remotely similar in terms of abuse and excess as is seen throughout the Hebrew writings, and by the hands of true prophets of God. It is to be further noted that the Quran does allude to some episodes where the Israelites were confronted to, or were about to engage the Canaanites. Everytime, it refrains from mentionning the shocking acts which the Israelites have comitted. The Quran could have used these incidents as divinely sanctionned precedents allowing unrestricted bloodshed and abuses. Yet we keep on reading in the context of warfare, verses stressing self-restraint in retaliation, or the non-materialistic goals of fighting in Allah's way.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "A “Prophet” for Profit: More of Muhammad’s Inconsistencies Exposed"

Acts17apologetics are no road bandits; Prophet raids caravans?

Acts17apologetics play mad max; Prophet's first military missions?

Acts17apologetics investigate a battle; Badr was a caravan raid?

Acts17apologetics financial issues; Prophet enriched through war spoils?

Acts17apologetics wont have a wealthy ruler; the prophet's fiancial situation?

Sam Shamoun "A “Prophet” for Profit: More of Muhammad’s Inconsistencies Exposed" (1)

Sam Shamoun "A “Prophet” for Profit: More of Muhammad’s Inconsistencies Exposed"

Until 9:29, the sura Tawba prescribed divine punishment upon 3 groups; the hypocrites among the Muslims, the treacherous warmongers among the idolaters, and those idolaters insisting on their pagan practices within the sacred precincts of Mecca.

No punishment is prescribed on the peaceful idolaters beyond Mecca, as well as those in Mecca that refrain from their rituals at the sacred sites re-dedicated strictly to the Islamic religion. They are to be left unharmed, see link below.

Nor is there until now any legal directive towards the remaining non-Muslims living under Muslim rule, whether in Mecca or beyond. This included the people of the book (Jews and Christians) or the followers of other belief systems, or even atheists

9:29"Fight those who believe not in God and nor in the Last Day and nor do they forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden and nor do they follow the religion/DEEN of truth from among the people of the book, till they give the compensation with a willing hand, while they are humble".

This verse, as attested by the prophetic practice, is not restricted to the people of the book. It covers any religion that was and could potentially fall under Muslim rule as a result of provoked warfare. The verse mentions 4 categories;

1- Those who do not believe in God

2- Those who reject the resurrection

3- Those who regard as lawful what Allah and the prophet have forbidden. Those that pass the 2 preceding criteria by believing in God and the concept of resurrection, should adhere to Islam as the only reasonable spiritual reality. If they make the choice not to, then they are believers in one of the many man made religions that does not forbid what Allah has forbidden through His prophet in the Quran and sunna. Or they might be from the people of the book, believers in God and the resurrection. Being sincere in their faith, they should, like the aforementioned group naturally enter the fold of Islam. The Quran speaks of them, those that remained truthful to the scriptures in anyway, shape or form it reached them, trying to follow it to the best of their ability. Their sincerity, unprejudiced, praiseworthy reading and understanding of their books led many of them to eventually believe in the revelation bestowed on the prophet Muhammad 2:121,83,3:113-115,199,4:162,5:13,66,69,83,7:159-170,17:107-9,28:52-4. But those that make the choice not to, they remain as people of the book who despite their sincerity in faith, do not regard as forbidden what Allah and His messenger forbade.

4- Those who do not follow the DEEN of truth from among the people of the book. The root D-Y-N means rule or debt or any obligation. It may be summarized as "system". It is used this way in the Quran 9:36,12:76 classical literature and even in common Arabic speak. Whenever the preposition "mina" is used before a composite entity, or a group, and that this entity is given a qualification, then "mina" carries the meaning of "among", pointing to a portion from among that composite entity 4:46,160,5:5,23,41,57,107,8:65,57:10. "The Deen of truth" in that phrase cannot refer to Islam as a religion. One cannot speak of a portion from among the people of the book as being followers of Islam while others reject it. This speaks of the Jews and Christians whom the Quran in many places condemns as sinful, insincere to the truth of their own books. The praiseworthy among them, followers of "the deen of truth" were those included in the 3rd category.

None of the groups above are to be fought until they become Muslims. Rather until they pay the jizya in submission to the Islamic rule. That subjection is in relation to the Islamic system which they are now bound to, being permanent non Muslim residents under protection of the Muslim state. The majority of Muslim scholars have understood the passage in that way. See for example al-Shafi'i, Al-Umm, Vol. 4, Ahmad Mustafa al-Maraghi's Tafsir Vol. 10 or Fatani, Ikhtilaf al-Darin p48. This is also seen by the fact that the musta'min (a non Muslim temporary resident) is not subjected to the Islamic legal system nor the jizya, according to the Hanafi school. That subjection has thus nothing to do with humiliation, as some have interpreted, and without any evidence in the prophetic practice nor that of the first caliphs. Humiliation does occur however, when those non-Muslim residents of the Islamic state refuse to pay government taxes to the point they have to be forcefully made to. Just as Muslims, shortly after the prophet's death had to be fought, humbled, and forced to pay the government taxes under Abu Bakr's caliphate.

The order to fight therefore isnt motivated by a choice of creed otherwise the mere paying of a tax would not have been enough to end the fighting, rather a forceful conversion would. Yet that option is never proposed in the verse. The only issue for them is explicitly spelled out; Payment of taxes and submission to the laws of the religious state they live in as members of a different religion on whom different rights and obligations apply. The government has actually more to gain in wealth and manpower if they convert, especially in early times when Muslims were a minority in these newly conquered lands. Yet they are told to keep their religion and autonomy instead.

Converting to Islam, something that isnt incumbent upon them, would end the command to fight them should they insist on not paying the jizya. But they will not escape being fought should they refuse honoring the duties that fall upon them as Muslims, including contributing financially to the functioning of the Islamic state, as well as obligations that did not apply to their former religious communities, like military service. There really is no true incentive for them to leave their religion which is why the option is never proposed in the verse.

The verses that follow illustrate some of the transgressions of the people of the book, and their causes, such as deification of prominent personalities, blind following of their religious leaders etc, while no blame is placed on them for not following Islam. These dark deviations in religion will never extinguish the light of guidance, no matter how much the disbelievers among the people of the book dislike it 9:32. The verse employs the image of a person attempting to extinguish a strong light with a blow from the mouth, to illustrate the relative feebleness of his position.

The passage ends with the reiteration of a prophecy made long before 48:28,61:9 regarding the prevailing of the deen/way of truth sent by the One true God over all other ways no matter how much the polytheists dislike it 9:33. The wording of this verse is very appropriate since it specifically mentions the polytheists, followers of non-divine religions, as disliking the establishment of the deen of truth. The people of the book, sincere to their scriptures as pointed earlier, will not dislike the establishment of a Godly system, since it does not only mean establishing Islam, but also exposing and establishing the truth of their own religion

5:83"And when they hear what has been revealed to the messenger you will see their eyes overflowing with tears on account of the truth that they recognize".

The Jizya is a collective tax, not a head tax. It is imposed on the people of dhimma, the diminutive for dimmat Allah wa rasulih, the protection of God and His messenger. This connection demonstrates the significance of the dhimmis, making them eligible for protection under divine obligation. The prophet applied the command upon Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians and according to some scholars like abu Hanifa, the pagans, based on a prophetic saying

"If they (Arab polytheists) accept the dhimmah contract (aqd al-dhimmah), then inform them that they have the same rights and duties as Muslims".

The jizya imposed on them is a collective tax because it is agreed upon by mutual consultation, not arbitrarily decided by the Muslim state. The nature of the compensation to the Muslim state varied depending on the capacities of each one. It was not always monetary and its amount was adaptable to each case. The benefits which the government offers in exchange of the due jizya, are matters of communal and national interest - defending the territory from outside aggression, establishing security, maintaining the environment, building infrastructure, etc., not the sort of benefits you can opt out of. The earliest Muslim rulers even appointed a portion of the Muslim zakat to feed the needy among the people of the book, even though they were exempted from paying the jizya. When a Jew came asking the caliph Umar for money, he said

"go find him and those like him, and give them out of the public treasury".

It is known that together with the needy, the clergy was also exempted from the tax by the Muslim authorities. And yet they fully benefited from government services, including military protection and infrastructure. These exception to the rule of 9:29 are based upon strong and firm unconditional principles as regards the Muslim duty towards the weak in any society, and the preservation of the worship sites of the people of the book where the name of Allah is mentioned. There is thus a strong Quranic basis for the policy of most Muslim rulers, including as early as the caliph Umar, of being selective in the application of the jizya upon the people of dhimma.

Even though Jizya it is not a personal head tax, for the sake of argument, one can either pay taxes willingly, or be punished through several forceful means including jail in case of refusal, or leave the country. In a secular state the issue is pretty much the same. Special taxes will apply to alien residents, who in addition to having to compensate the state for providing them with benefits of all kind, must also exempt themselves from the obligations and rights that apply to the citizen of that state (military service, various taxes on salaries, financial regulations etc). Paying that tax will protect them from being pursued and punished by that government.

Some insidious critics like calling it "protection money". Every taxation system in the world is in fact aimed at providing protection; either by financing a system that preserves the well-being of the society as a whole, or by protecting against punishment, since failing to pay results in sanctions. Jizya is the rightful compensation demanded from the dhimmi, in exchange of the exemption from the laws, rights, obligations, penalties etc of that state religion in matters that do not concern the society as a whole. That is because the sharia for Muslim governance of non-Muslim citizens is that non-Muslims should not be forced to follow the moral laws dictated in the Quran.

The idea that this model oppressed non Muslim dhimmis to the point they preferred conversion is unfounded, without any historical and documented basis. It wasnt therefore a system aimed at enriching anyone, but a legitimate compensation for concrete services and exemptions. That is why non-Muslims that volontarily participated in the military were exempted from the tax. Those that paid the tax and werent properly served were refunded. For instance when Muslim ruled Syria was threatened with invasion by the Romans and the Muslim ruler doubted whether he would be able to protect the non-Muslims of that region, he hastily returned their jizya money which was supposed to be partly aimed at guarantying their protection. Abu Ubaydah ibn al Jarrah told the Christians they would be bound by the agreement again only if he is able to fend off the Roman invasion. The Christians consequently prayed for Muslim victory, knowing that the Romans would never behave with them in such a manner.

Under that system, non Muslims enjoy complete religious autonomy as long as it does not conflict with the state religion. For example selling alcohol publicly. Dhimmis may deliberate, individualy deny, or reform their religious laws to their liking and to fit their desires without any concern about the laws of the state, again, so long as no conflict occurs between the 2. For example it is well known that Christian and Jewish elites enacted laws preventing their people from resorting to a Muslim judge in cases where their own laws were unfavorable.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "A “Prophet” for Profit: More of Muhammad’s Inconsistencies Exposed"

Apostate prophet salutes everyone; Prophet said do not greet the Jews?

Apostate prophet taken by the hand; step by step analysis of sura tawba?

Apostate prophet sees sura 9 through a new angle; Muslim restraint?

Sunday, December 13, 2020

Sam Shamoun "Another Verse That Exposes Muhammad as a Fraud: The Nonexistent Temple"

Only one location is said to be dedicated to those performing the ritual prayers, as well as the pilgrimage and it is the Kaaba, Becca, the Ancient House and al masjid al haram, all names referring to one same place with the definite article and with almost identical wording 2:125,158,196,3:96-7,9:19,22:26,29, all connecting the Abrahamic legacy to one and the same place. This unquestionably links the Kaaba, Becca, Mecca with some of the most important rituals of Islam.

The revisionist argument that these locations are disconnected and unrelated is based upon the faulty mehtodology of isolating statements out of their direct and wider context. The requirement that a particular Quranic statement needs to be fully detailed in each context is unnecessary. Any type of literary research, especially historical, is done by piecing together related information. Conjecture is stripping statements out of their direct and larger context and ignoring surrounding indicators, then drawing clumsy conclusions.

The turning point of the Quraysh's animosity towards the Prophet was following the Night Journey (isra/miraj): Muhammad was transported, according to tradition on a horse like celestial creature called Al-Buraq.

Heavenly creatures transported previous prophets on otherwordly journeys 2Kings2:11, besides the mention of extraordinary celestial creatures by prophets the likes of Ezekiel. Muhammad was transported from masjid al haram/the inviolable masjid, ie Mecca, to masjid al aqsa/the furthest masjid, ie Jerusalem, then back to Mecca. The event is shortly mentionned in the Quran

17:1"Glory be to Him Who made His servant to go on a night from the Sacred Mosque to the remote mosque of which We have blessed the precincts, so that We may show to him some of Our signs; surely He is the Hearing, the Seeing".

The manner and process in which this occured is not precisely stated in the verse, nor did the prophet leave any clear-cut explanation of this experience. What can be gathered is that in one night, he was made to see and experience the farthest masjid in relation to Mecca at the time, located in Jerusalem, and certain aspects of it, as if he was physically there. This is very similar to the prophet Ezekiel's experience, when

Ezek40:1"the hand of the Lord was upon me, and He brought me there".

Ezekiel here refers to Babylon where he was preaching to the enslaved nation of Israelites, unto Jerusalem, where he would be shown the appearance and measurements of the new temple. This was done in a strong and compulsive way as is so often denoted throughout this book whenever Ezekiel speaks of his revelational experience

"In the visions of God He brought me to the land of Israel, and He placed me on a very lofty mountain..."

Ezekiel was thus "transported" in a manner we cannot fathom "in the visions of God" from one distant place to another, interracting with the physical features of the area

Ezek47:4"..and he led me through water that reached the loins.."

He spoke there with entities addressing him with terms indicating physical presence on site

Ezek40:4"And the man spoke to me, "Son of man, see with your eyes and with your ears hear, and set your heart to all that I am showing you, because in order to show you, you have been brought here; tell all that you see to the House of Israel".

During his metaphysical experience, the prophet prayed and lead the prayer among the prophets of God at masjid al aqsa. On his way back to Mecca, at night, he encountered a caravan in the desert belonging to the Quraysh. He drank their water in their sleep and poured the rest and also saw a camel they had lost on the way.

The next day in Mecca, the prophet publicly spoke of what had occured to him. This was a bold move by the prophet and some Muslims even apostized when they heard his incredible experience. His opponents tried contradicting him by asking a description of the masjid of Jerusalem. It would be very far fetched to claim the Arabs of Hijaz, caravan merchants who frequently travelled to that region, interracting with the Judeo-Christian communities of the peninsula and beyond, were ignorant that the Temple of Jerusalem had been destroyed then. The Quran itself in the same passage states that twice, the Temple was subject to destruction

17:8"that they might destroy whatever they gained ascendancy over with utter destruction".

For them to ask eyewitness testimony means they could falsify his statement in case of wrong answer. But this never happened. The prophet's wordings and descriptions do not suggest that he was speaking of an enclosed building with a roof. Ruins of the Temple had remained there, including parts of the wall surrounding it, as well as other recognizable features. The prophet's opponents asked about a specific detail of the site which they could recognize

"When Quraysh rejected what I said, I stood in al-Hijir and God showed me Bayt al-Maqdis so I started telling them about its signs while looking at it"
"Some of them said: How many doors are there in that mosque/masjid? I had not counted them so I began to look at it and counted them one by one and gave them information concerning them".

They asked him about the gates. Till this day, these gates can be seen and are known by the names of those that recently rediscovered them. One of these gates is even called "the prophet's gate" through which it is said he entered masjid al aqsa on his night journey. These were the architectural features known to the prophet's enemies, present at the site, and which they pressed him about. Had the story been an anachronism, the hadith would have instead portrayed the prophet as describing some characteristics of the site which did not exist at his time.

As to the prophet refering to the masjid as BAYT, this does not necessarily mean a closed space either. Bayt is used for what provides shelter. It is used in Arabic for a home/house, as well as one's family and even a city. Whether it is in modern day Israel or in the Palestinian territories, in the Hebrew or Arabic, we still find names of cities starting with Bayt, as in Bayt Lahm/Bethlehem, Bayt Lahiya etc. When the prophet was shown Bayt al Maqdis, this could be referring to the city of Jerusalem, more specifically the blessed precincts within 17:1. When the prophet began describing its signs, his opponents pressed him regarding the masjid, the place of prostration within the city/Bayt al maqdis. They did not ask how many gates are there in "bayt al maqdis", rather they wanted to know how many were there in the "masjid" of Bayt al maqdis.

The Quran contains many passages speaking of entering and interracting inside an open area, such as the holy land or even masjid al haram in Mecca, which didnt even have walls at the time of the prophet 5:22,48:27. The Temple of Solomon was a site where Jews prostrated to God. Very devout Jews even considered it the only place fit for a complete prostration. Jewish rituals and prayers, including prostrations were made in that area even before the Temple was built 1Sam1. Hence the appropriateness for the Quran to refer to the area of masjid al aqsa as one

17:1"whose precincts We did bless".

It was a blessed and sacred area, a terminology always associated with the land given to Abraham and those that followed him among the Israelites, including Solomon 5:21,7:137,21:71,81. This is why the Muslims were told to prostrate in that direction when the qibla was first changed. The triliteral root S-J-D lit. means the volontary display of weakness in front of someone in order to show that they are in complete control. The best physical display of that concept for humans is when they prostrate. Masjid is thus the place where that action occurs, it is "the place of prostration".

The word is used for both Muslim and non-Muslim sites 17:7. Whether the place is closed, open or including buildings in which one may prostrate is irrelevant to the meaning of masjid, as seen earlier with the area of masjid al haram. There are narrations where the prophet distinguishes between the Kaaba and the masjid around it, at a time where no building surrounded the area of prostration around the Kaaba

"One should undertake journey to three mosques: the mosque of the Ka’ba, my mosque, and the mosque of Elia".

The Kaaba in itself is not meant for prostration even though one may exceptionally enter it for that purpose. But whether in the prophet's time or later, pilgrims did not practice prostration inside but in the open space around it. The same goes for Masjid al Aqsa today. It is an open area of prostration, once cynically left as a garbage dump by Christians until Umar conquered and restored it. Just as with masjid al haram, this open area of prostration in Jerusalem includes nowadays the dome of the rock (golden roof) and the Qibli mosque originally built by Umar, then expanded 50 years later by the caliph Malik.

The prophet said in the traditions that the entire Earth was made a masjid for him so that his followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due. Early mosques that were nothing but a few stones arranged to mark the mihrab (direction of Kaaba), like those of the Negev region, attest to the fact that a masjid does not need to be a building. This is in accordance with the prophet's teachings. He disliked extravagance and impressive architecture in buildings, especially mosques. Later, this word was used to designate Islamic places of worship in particular.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Another Verse That Exposes Muhammad as a Fraud: The Nonexistent Temple"

Reason for Ambiguous verses in the Quran

Saturday, December 12, 2020

Sam Shamoun "A Puppy Trumps Allah, Jibril, and Muhammad!"

Neither Allah, the angels, the prophet nor his followers hated dogs in an absolute sense, nor any other animals, as seen from the many traditions, the Quran itself and the understanding of the scholars towards the fair physical and emotional treatment of all animals. Cynophobia is rather abounding in the HB, as will be shown later.

The prophet did not mind his grandsons having a puppy in his own house, until the incident with Jibril mentioned below.

There was once an interval of several days where revelation stopped and which distressed the prophet. He began thinking that he had done something wrong, or that, as his opponents taunted him, that Allah had abandoned him. Once revelation descended in the form of sura duha/93 he was told that neither was the case, and that this interruption obeys to a higher reality independent of anyone's whims. This bellies the notion that the reason of the interruption had anything to do with the prophet, whether in deeds (such as having a dog at home) or thoughts. This is further borne out by the fact that the prophet did receive revelation in different locations and conditions, and that a time finally arrived where revelation was about to descend on him. Jibril came to him and told him to prepare to receive revelation at his home. But when it did not occur as announced, it was this time due to a worldly reason specific to his home

"Jibril came to me and said; "Indeed I had come to you last night, and nothing prevented me from entering upon you at the house you were in, except that there were images of men at the door of the house, and there was a curtain screen with imagines on it, and there was a dog in the house. So go and sever the head of the image that is at the door so that it will become like a tree stump, and go and cut the screen and make two throw-cushions to be sat upon, and go and expel the dog." So the Messenger of Allah did so, and the dog was a puppy belonging to Al-Husain or Al-Hasan which was under his belongings, so he ordered him to expel it".

The details of the hadith vary depending on the chain, but the primary point remains that angels do not enter houses where specific things are found.

Angels are not superhumans. They are a different creature. They have likes and dislikes, capacities and limits different than humans. For example the traditions relate how the angel Gabriel himself was limited and could not ascend to where the prophet Muhammad was permitted to enter during the mi'raj. The hadith here does not specify the reason for singling out dogs, so we can only conjecture. A legitimate question one might ask is, since the interruption had nothing to do with an issue with the prophet, that revelation did and could descend anywhere outside his home, with Jibril even coming to him just a night before and at a different location to announce his imminent visit, then why didnt Jibril just choose another place than the "problematic" home in order to reveal sura duha?

What is first important noting is that these are not any type of angels, but the angels of revelation. Regular persons arent visited by such angels anyway so the issue of keeping dogs inside doesn't necessarily apply to anyone and any circumstance. But seeing how the noblest of them would refrain entering upon a prophet for that reason, makes one appreciate that, besides the representation of unidentified male figures (it was not only about a "puppy"), there must be an intrinsic reason in the dog in question. And this is understood through a contextual analysis of the report. This reveals an important point, one ever stressed by hadith commentators. When one tries to understand a hadith, which is a snippet of a larger statement, it cannot be done in a vacuum but in light of its time and circumstances, the potential question/remark the prophet was reacting/answering to, as well as the vast corpus of extra Quran material so as to establish a pattern of thought and behavior.

A glaring example is the report

"Evil omen is in the women, the house and the horse".

The narrator did not report the context of the prophet's statement, which was in fact a condemnation of what some pre-islamic Arabs believed and what contemporary Jews said. There are even reports where the prophet equates belief in bad omen with shirk.

As to dog, they were extensively used by the Arabs in the prophet's time, for specific purposes and not as pets. The angelic instruction not to keep dogs inside homes could be due to the particular breed of the prophet's environment, one that can potentially be harmful, hence its use to ward off danger. It could have been that this breed of dogs was not meant to be, neither for its own good or the good of the owner, kept in a closed space. The prophet, by allowing a seemingly harmless puppy in his home as a pet so as to please his grandsons, could have given or started a potentially harmful (not sinful) trend in the community. As in many cases, some special circumstances, sometimes having to do with the prophet and sometimes with other members of the community, were used by Allah as a means by which to illustrate what is more appropriate and beneficial for society.

After this incident, the prophet became more aware of the issue of human interaction with the dogs of his environment, which he might have taken too lightly. He allowed domesticated dogs for useful purposes in farming, herding, guarding or hunting but discouraged keeping them as pets, inside the homes, except if it is for self-defense. It would be oppressive and cruel to keep these types of dogs and any other such animal as pets. They are unsuited to remain in a confined environment. This could have been another reason for the angelic instruction.

“The reward of a person who keeps a dog for reasons other than herding, hunting, or agriculture is decreased every day by a qiraat".

As a side note, how did this visitor know of the presence of a puppy, hidden somewhere in the house?

Historically there was a problem of disease transmitting dogs in Medina, who carried rabies. These were stray dogs that in addition, were ferocious and attacked people. Although the problem existed, the prophet as a leader in Medina had not turned his attention to it prior to the incident involving Jibril.

The term used in some ahadith is kalb al aakur/biting, wild or rabid dog. The expression covered not only dogs but different types of wild beasts roaming the desert

"Malik said, about the "kalb akur" which people were told to kill in the Haram, that any animals that wounded, attacked, or terrorised men, such as lions, leopards, Iynxes and wolves, were counted as "kalb akur"".

As to the dog specie, the harmful ones were recognized by their pitch black color, as the prophet stated in his khutbah on the matter

"If it were not that dogs were a nation among nations, then I would order that they be killed. So kill every one among them that is all black".

During that same khutbah, some people asked what should be done with other dogs, namely the domesticated ones, to which the prophet stated they should be spared. This was a clarification of his statement that dogs, as a nation like any other isnt intrinsically evil/harmful, and should therefore not be indiscriminately killed, but there are evil/harmful elements among them who should be.

Due to the problems they caused, the prophet referred to these black dogs as devils, as is often used in Arabic in reference to something harmful. We're not talking of chihuahuas here but specially aggressive dogs. The fear they instilled, and consequent distraction, caused prayers to be disrupted if they approached while one is performing the rituals. Even what we consider today as pet dogs are put to death by the authorities when deemed too dangerous. There is thus nothing insensitive or extraordinary in the prophet's decision, in light of the reality of his time. Following the prophet's khutbah, some people were over-zealous in the application of the command, killing dogs indiscriminately

"Allah's Messenger ordered us to kill dogs, and we carried out this order so much so that we also kill the dog coming with a woman from the desert. Then Allah's Apostle forbade their killing. He (the Prophet further) said: It is your duty the jet-black (dog) having two spots (on the eyes), for it is a devil."

Dogs are not impure in and of themselves otherwise the Quran would not have made it permissible to consume the game hunted by trained dogs/mukalibeen 5:4. It also specifically mentions the dog that slept for years next to a group of righteous people 18:18. These people and their dog had divine miracles performed on them.

The simple fact is the Quran had many occasions to declare these animals impure or evil but did not. Even in the case of wild/street dogs, impurity does not equal to mistreatment. In a report the prophet said

"A prostitute was forgiven by Allah, because, passing by a panting dog near a well and seeing that the dog was about to die of thirst, she took off her shoe, and tying it with her head-cover she drew out some water for it. So, Allah forgave her because of that".

In a similar narration where a man went down a well to save a dog from thirst, the people reacted, asking

"O Allah's Messenger, Is there a reward for us in serving (the) animals?" He replied, "Yes, there is a reward for serving any animate".

There is thus a general principle, well established in the Quran and traditions as regards animal and environmental welfare

"When Allah's Messenger was asked about donkeys, he replied, "Nothing particular was revealed to me regarding them except the general unique verse which is applicable to everything: "Whoever does goodness equal to the weight of an atom (or small ant) shall see it (its reward) on the Day of Resurrection".

This is because, according to the prophet

"In every living being there is a reward for charity"

further

"There is no Muslim who plants a tree or sows seeds and then a bird, or a person, or an animal eats from it except that it is regarded as a charity for him"

and

"If someone kills so much as a sparrow or anything larger without a just cause, then Allah the Exalted will ask him about it on the Day of Resurrection".

There would have been ground for general assumptions as regards the Islamic stance on dogs, had there been similar depictions as the ones found in the Bible, in which one finds nothing but Contempt and negative metaphors of dogs. Whether in the mouth of Jesus in Matt7 who parallels human wickedness to the most hated animals to a Jew, dogs and pigs, or in the writings of the prophets of the HB. Down to the book of Revelation22, dogs are associated with the most wicked dwellers of hell. Even the price for which a dog, any dog, is sold is forbidden to be brought into the Temple for a vow

Deut23"you shall not bring a prostitute's fee or the price of a dog, to the House of the Lord, your God, for any vow, because both of them are an abomination to the Lord, your God".

This is a reoccurring theme; dogs, like swine and other morally degenerate people like prostitutes and sorcerers are intrinsically evil and hateful. YHWH's cynophobia, not that of His angels or the humans, is such that He cannot stand their presence or anything related to them in His most sacred site.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "A Puppy Trumps Allah, Jibril, and Muhammad!"

Apostate prophet finds pattern of prophecy; piecemeal revelations?

Apostate prophet belongs to a known community; the opponents of the sequential revelation?

Apostate prophet studies prophecy; wisdom in partial revelations?

Apostate prophet does not see it; opponents's impatience to the divine system?

Sam Shamoun "A Docile Beast Falsifies the Quran: How A Sheep Trumped Allah and His “Messenger”!"

This article answers Sam Shamoun "A Docile Beast Falsifies the Quran: How A Sheep Trumped Allah and His “Messenger”!"

Sam Shamoun "The Hadith of the Goat and Adult Suckling"

Sam Shamoun "The Quran’s Geographical Errors Pt. 1"(4)

The pre-Islamic Arabs used a combined Lunar/Solar calendar, and would periodically add a month in order to compensate for the shorter lunar year as opposed to the solar year. This resulted in fixing their rituals, like the yearly pilgrimage, to more convenient times from certain aspects. However, Islam banned the addition of such months 9:36-7. This meant that the month of Ramadan is now rotating through the year in a 33 year cycle.

This avoids the convenient fixation of certain religious practices according to human whims, for purely wordly motives, violating God's established sacred months and allowing an ordinary month to be observed as sacred and vice versa.

For example the pre-Islamic Arabs used this practice to avoid the disadvantages for their trade. Banning the intercalary month opens up the way for spiritual improvement, training one to perform his duties at all times of the year and under all circumstances. Also, from the viewpoint of the universality of religion, it is obvious that the periods of fasting and performing Haj cannot satisfy all if they be fixed, always falling in the same season and month in different places-summer or winter or very hot or very cold or rainy or dry or harvesting or sowing-year after year.

The Islamic time-keeping system is in fact the most scientifically relevant, because it does not require intercallation and thus making its precise reference point known to the day. Add to this the fact that the Islamic calendar is the only one that is divested from all elements of overt and parenthetical shirk, such as how the days of the week and the months of the year are named.

Much like the pre-Islamic pagan practice, the Hebrew month is based on the moon-cycle and therefore consists of 29/30 days. The year however is accounted for following the solarcycle, but because this creates a difference of +-11 days (Lunar year/354days vs solar year/365days), then adjustments needed to be made in order to allow the fixation of the different festivals (Pesach, Shavuot and Sukkot) to certain seasons (spring, summer and autumn respectively). The solution to having a lunisolar calendar is to periodically insert an extra 30-day month into a year, creating a 13-month year. The Torah however never reckons the time of the sacred rituals and festivals using the sun cycle, but always on a monthly basis according to moon sighting

Numb28:14"This is the monthly burnt offering to be made at each new moon during the year"
Ezek46:3"And the people of the land shall [also] prostrate themselves at the entrance of that gate on the Sabbaths and on the New Moons, before the Lord"

Sam Shamoun "The Quran’s Geographical Errors Pt. 1"(3)

In 12:43-57 Yusuf predicted a period of hardship and hunger that would eventually come to an end and which the nation would overcome should it prepare itself following his advise. The end of that difficult period is described as

12:49"a year in which the people YUGHATH and in which they shall press".

YUGHATH has 2 potential roots gh-y-th and gh-w-th. It primarily implies a sense of help or deliverance, that could be defined and ascertained from the context. For example in 18:29 it says, speaking of the desperation of the hell dwellers

"if YASTAGHITHU/they ask for relief, YUGHATHU/they will be relieved bimain/with water, like melted brass".

YUGHATH is here used twice and shows that the effect of someone being "yughath" or relieved may include through water but not necessarily. In 8:9 the effect of when the believers tastaghithuna/asked for relief was that God answered by sending thousands of angels. Similar usage is found in 28:15,46:17.

So how did the people yughath in that year of relief? It could have been through water from direct rain, in ancient Egypt rainfall was not very rare and in fact the rulers took measures to protect their archaeological structures from damage due to the occasional heavy downpours. It could have also been through the water of the Nile. Egypt's agriculture up to this day and more so in ancient times, is and was heavily dependent on the Nile's swelling, flooding and fertilizing of farming areas. Obviously without rain upstream and in the high plateaux there would be no swelling of rivers downstream and ultimately of the Nile to allow the inundation of farming areas, their fertilization and irrigation. So the relief could also be referring to water from indirect rainfall.

The period of relief and abundance will be such that, according to Yusuf's interpretation of the king's dream, they will eventually be able to press. This suggests that the conditions would be favorable to allow enough time for planting, growing and harvesting crops, then finally press them. This particular detail and its mention to the king is very much in line with the historical importance of pressing wine and oil particularly to the royalty and for religious purposes in ancient Egypt.

That remarkable detail offered in the Quran is absent from the Biblical account, showing how as usual the subtle differences between the 2 scriptures are loaded with meaning and are certainly not insignificant. As a side note, one presses grapes to get wine. When 12:36 says "pressing wine" there is no misunderstanding that it is speaking of the end result of a process, just as one would speak of "building a house" while raising one of the walls.

Sam Shamoun "The Quran’s Geographical Errors Pt. 1"(2)

Taken from Apostate prophet finds a crack; the solid sky of the Quran?

The Quran implies the non-solid nature of the various created samawaat/heavens. It firstly says that the primordial sama' was gaseous 41:11. It calls sama' the area where we are, above the ground composed of jaww/air where birds fly, clouds move 16:79,30:48 which is nothing else than the troposphere. There are living creatures WITHIN (not under or upon) the heavens/assamawaat 27:87,29:22,42:29, including ourselves.

"Pieces from the sky" coming down on earth, as the disbelievers repeatedly challenged the prophet 17:92,26:187 does not mean chunks coming off the gaseous atmospheric entity above, but rather simply signifies originating from the region of the sky. This includes any meteorological phenomena such as hail, or stones as occurred with the destroyed town of Lot, or as similarly happened with the invading army of the elephant in Mecca, meteors, asteroids or any other space debris. It even includes clouds, coming down from the sky. In fact the Quran states that when this phenomenon occurs on the resurrection, these disbelievers will think they are invaded by clouds 52:44, yet it will neither be solid pieces nor clouds but a smoke coming from assama'/the sky that will overtake them in such a way they will not find any escape route from it 44:10-11. Had the Quran assumed a solid sky, this would have been the most appropriate place for it to speak of chunks of canopy detaching and falling.

A quiet dreadful image is pictured in 39:16,77:30-4 with the disbelievers on the day of resurrection, told to proceed and advance to what they denied, only to find themselves trapped from their front, left and right, from above and below, with a kind of "shade" that will neither be cooling nor protecting, but rather blazing and sparking.

That shade, which actually is the darkness cast by a thick and burning smoke, will pursue them until hell 56:43-44 -hence the often alluded to blackened and dusty face of the doomed 80:40-2- where they will be trapped from all sides and engulfed by the fire 7:41,29:55.

If the opponent wants to argue that the broad and general word sama' refers in 17:92,26:187,52:44 to the atmosphere, then it still means the Quran is correctly implying it is composed of gases. No solid entities will fall from it. As a side note, the Quran says the sama' is expanding 51:47 and that the sun and moon, which are all in one same sama' with other cosmic bodies like the stars 25:61, all literally swim/yasbahun in it 21:33,36:40,79:3. There is no swimming in a solid entity.

All the samawaat/plural of sama', have been raised high 20:4 (see Bible in Isa55:9). Particular attention is directed at one of these layers and how it was raised 88:18,55:7 with its highest point, which we could interpret as the top of the atmosphere, appearing like a vault above the earth, called the roof/saqf 52:5. The sama' was originally one entity, then perfected into a "good" state, made thick/samk 79:28, into several distinct but harmonious entities as denoted with tabaq/levels/layers 2:29,67:3,71:15. Each layer has its function 78:12 and is firmly secured. Some of these layers offer protection to the earth like a roof does (stratosphere, mesosphere, upwards) 2:22,40:64 which is why many translators rendered binaa'/structure as roof or canopy in these verses. As shown earlier these verses clearly parallel the hospitability of our world to a tent, with its comfortable floor (earth), elsewhere likened to a cradle 20:53,78:6 and its stretched roof providing protection.

The spreading of heavens is a notion found all throughout the Hebrew Bible Ps104:2,Isa42:5,44:24,45:12,Jer10:12, with the added qualification that it is a "hard" entity that could not have been spread other than by the power of God Job37:18. Due to that hardness, the descent of an entity down to earth necessitates the bending and parting of the solid heavens 2Sam22:10,Ps18:10. These heavens also appear like a circular canopy above the earth, on which God "sits" Isa40:22.
Nothing even remotely similar appears in the Quran although the metaphors of creation employed in both the HB and the Quran are very close.

The samawaat/heavens are in a state of harmony, they are guarded and remain layered as they are for the maintenance of life on Earth. The massive heavenly components above do not collide nor come down on Earth as to cause complete destruction 21:32,22:65. It is Allah Who upholds all the heavens/samawaat so as to avoid that outcome, without any pillars as we can see 13:2. This verse, meant at striking the reader with the constant necessity for Allah's might and mercy by holding up the complex order of things above at all times without relying on any supports like pillars, would make absolutely no sense if it meant Allah actually relied on invisible pillars to do the job. He does so through His laws of nature which He maintains at each instant 32:5,65:12 making both heavens and earth to subsist by His command 30:25, these laws through which He prevents both heaven and earth from ceasing to function, and which uphold them BOTH

22:65,35:41"upholds the heavens and the earth lest they come to naught".

Allah therefore upholds/yumsik both heavens and earth, not only the heavens or what is above the earth. This gives an additional dimension to the word "upholding", giving it the sense of "sustaining" as well. This passage also demonstrates the delicate balance the Quran makes in its use of general but appropriate words, so as to not confirm nor deny the views of nature of its reader, focusing instead on the spiritual message. By upholding both heavens and earth, the Quran does not depict the earth as "the bottom" of the universe for just as the heavens are upheld, the earth too is upheld by Allah. If one wishes to find "indications" on whether the earth is stationary or not, then one can as well reflect the Quranic depiction of the general motion of all celestial bodies floating in their independent trajectories, as applying to the earth too which is floating in space. A modern reader could then also assume, since this upholding is done without any visible pillars, then it must be done through God establishing an equilibrium between the repelling and attractive forces at play in the universe. These forces by the way are known to be on the thinest of razor edges, where the slightest variation will throw the entire system into disarray

54:49"Surely We have created everything according to a measure".

In the Hebrew Bible, God causes earthquakes by "touching" the land Amos9:5, which in turn shakes the pillars underneath and above it

Job9:6"He Who causes the earth to quake from its place, and its pillars shudder"

Isa24:18"the foundations of the earth have trembled"

Job26:11"The pillars of the heavens trembled and are astonished from His rebuke".

As stated again in 2Sam22:8, when the earth shakes, the tremor is felt in the heavens too because of the pillars holding them up. God's anger causes this quacking and the mountains are what the writers had in mind when speaking of "pillars" Ps18:7,104:32,114:4,Isa5:25.

To the primitive and imaginative mind, mountains, these huge objects set on the earth with the strength of God Ps65:7, existing since the beginning of the earth's creation Ps104:5-6, appear to be preventing earth and heavens from collapsing into one another. Elsewhere however there is mention of other pillars, holding the world itself up and that are visible at the bottom of the seas 1Sam2:8,2Sam22:16. These are the pillars that keep the land afloat above the waters on which it was established Ps24:2,136:6.

These citations arent meant at disparaging the Bible, rather at showing how different would have the Quran looked, had it represented the views of the ancients people who are supposed to have authored it. The Quran had plenty of occasions to make such statements, as the imageries used are many cases similar with the HB. And yet in not one instance does it even slip so as to betray the hand of its 7th century Arabian scribes.

Back to the Quran, it is God only that preserves the order of the things above us without having recourse to massive structures like pillars, as well as below us. He maintains that order despite man's ungratefulness, and if He would stop upholding them both, nothing -no pillars- would maintain them in order

"and if they should come to naught, there is none who can uphold them after Him; surely He is the Forbearing, the Forgiving".

Linguistically, the negation of a possibility does not necessarily entail its opposite. The statement "without pillars you can see" does not entail "with pillars you cannot see".

The universe, above and below, is thus maintained without disruptions, although cataclysms from heaven may exceptionally descend

22:65"except with His permission".

Until such a time arrives, the sky remains a source of protection to man like a structure just as the earth is a comfortable "couch" or a "cradle" allowing the development of life 2:22,20:53,40:64.

The verse 50:6 directs our eyes to a specific region of the sky; that of the stars where it precisely says that the cosmic bodies literally swim/yasbahun, ie a non-solid area. The verse 67:3 directs us for inspection not only to that same area but to all the heavens. These verses ask the audience and readers to look at all that is above and notice the coherence. There is no break in that coherence because of the regularity and uniformity of the laws working in the universe

"Who created the seven heavens one above another; you see no incongruity/futur in the creation of the Beneficent Allah; then look again, can you see any disorder?".

"Futur" literally means splitting lengthwise, though it also connotes breaking the fast, inconsistency, and corruption. Corruption is the intended sense herein. The blessed Verse is saying that no matter how attentively man studies the world of Creation, he may not find the least defect or disharmony in it. Many natural occurrences whether in the earth when floods, or earthquakes occur, or in the heavens when stars explode and celestial bodies collide, appear as blemishes at the first glance within the order of things. Further observations however reveal that there are significant causes behind them.

These verses come in the context of providing proof for divine justice because just as One Being subjected this world to coherent laws without any sudden break in uniformity, He will subject the hereafter to the same principle of coherence especially in regards to the just reward of good and evil.