Interesting dicussions on destruction of Makkah

[BarakzaiAbdali]

In fact my little friend that wandered from yonder across the Amu Darya

the isnaad of the right hand commentary itself is under scrutiny:

This hadith on the authority of Ibn `Abbas and others is related by Ibn Abi `Umar al-Ma`dani in his Musnad, Tabarani, Suyuti in his Jami` al-saghir 1:516 (#3804-3805), Ibn `Asakir in Tarikh Dimashq 15:90, 92, and others. It is considered da`if (weak) by Ibn al-Jawzi, Ibn `Adi, and Albani. Ibn Qutayba in Gharib al-hadith (3:107(1)) says that it is a saying of Ibn `Abbas.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Hi please prove contradiction when I mentioned the same thing you quoted of omar. Omar realized how foolish it is to kiss a stone. He knew it was just a stone but since the prophet did it he was doing it even he realized it is a form of worship. Hadees of omar proves my point that it is a stone being venerated idolized that is what the action of kissing it represents and he only did it because mohammad did it otherwise it contradict his monotheistic belief. The fact that this stone existed in kabba before islam and it importance to pagan Arabic people is evidence that it was a pagan worship idol. Mohammad simply continued on the pagan tradition. Same thing with the hajj. Since you like to quote independent sources show me from none muslims sources that gives evidence that the kabba hajj and the stone were placed by abraham or his sons as later claimed by muslim historians to justify these pagan practices which are completed rejected by the bible torah scriptures. It is also ironic that a monotheistic god needs veneration of a stone object to acknowledge fealty to. The more you try to justify this the more you dig yourself a hole harder to get out of. This stone is worshiped by each every muslim that goes to hajj i know this from my own muslim family friends relatives who risk being crushed just to touch it since it is the hand of god holding magic powers just like magic zam zam water. This stone is a beatyl which were meteorites that were worshiped by various pagan people. Let says you are right that it is not intended to be worshiped but it still is therefore it should be destroyed removed just like no image should exist of mohammad because it can lead to worship. My point that taliban should blow it up stands no matter sorry you are wrong.

Oh and regarding blowing it up... no.. you lose there too, since your logic is circular... you admit toward the tail end that it may not be something meant to be worshipped (admitting you lost) and then idiotically said the Taliban should then blow it up.... hmmm, would make sense of Omar, Abu Bakr or Muhammad (S) had done so... but they didnt. So we dont need to.

But maybe we can build a rocket and launch you back across Amu Darya?

[PakistaniAtheist]

Hi I am not from Albania and like a typical religious arrogant creature your insults and hyper mocking only reflects your fruitless frustration attempt to prove me wrong. You didnt prove me wrong I stated in my original post to al hanif that according muslims this is not part of islam but it is still worshiped therefore it should be destroyed since it leads to idolizing a stone a physical object the same way if an image of mohammad is created for aesthetic purpose it can lead to idolizing it is prohibited so in that sense logic the stone should be blown up just like the buddha statues were even they were not being worshiped. I also asked for independent sources to prove that the kabba was built by abraham and the stone was placed there by abraham or his sons like muslims claim to justify this pagan practice. I didnt ask you to show me if semites used stone dont jump like hyper active child calm down. I proved to you that a stone is venerated worshiped licked kissed in mecca in kabba and all you did was give me references that it is not mentioned in the quran it is not part of the prayer it is not this or that yet it is still there. No where I said that it was a god rather it is an object of worship which it is that contradicts muslim beliefs there it is in the heart of the muslim faith a stone that is idolized in all manners of action and ritual. Why would anyone kiss a stone if it is not venerated if it is not idolized if it is not loved it is not an object of faith conviction admiration or spiritual value. No sir you have not helped your case you keep digging your self in a hole. It is a stone that is ritually worshiped idolized it is a major contradiction in your religion and the best explanation you give is that the act might symbolism worship but it is only a pretend which questions the logic behind it. It is complete contradiction and utter irrationality. In other words you just kiss the stone because its there which is religious futility just for vanity. How absurd is that.

[PakistaniAtheist]

Oh and regarding blowing it up... no.. you lose there too, since your logic is circular... you admit toward the tail end that it may not be something meant to be worshipped (admitting you lost) and then idiotically said the Taliban should then blow it up.... hmmm, would make sense of Omar, Abu Bakr or Muhammad (S) had done so... but they didnt. So we dont need to.

But maybe we can build a rocket and launch you back across Amu Darya?

Hi no you are wrong i said that in my first post that it is considered not part of islam to worship it but people still do. Using then al hanif logic which he applied to the buddha statues this stone should be blown up. Omar realized the absurdity of this ritual but he was again doing so because mohammad did it just like he mentioned about taking his wife to prayer at mosque. Why would mohammad objectify an object after preaching against idols. The reason is to please the Arabic pagan tribes.

[PakistaniAtheist]

So far explanation is this stone is not significant it is not in the quran it is not in the prayer muslims just kiss it for show. Question now is why mohammad kissed it and pointed towards it. Muslims then claim it was put there by abraham and his sons. We need independent sources for that that abraham and his sons built the kabba and placed this stone there. On contrary in Arabia there were 4 historical kabbas with four different beaytl stones worshiped as gods by the pagan Arabic people. This stone is meaningless yet it is in the heart of the faith of muslims and part of the most important muslim ritual but it is still just a stone of no importance. It makes no sense. Instead this stone is worshiped and muslims believe it holds power that by kissing it takes away your sins gives you health secures your place in heaven. Muslims try to kiss it touch it lick it but yet it is not important. Still doesnt make sense. That was my point to al hanif if this stone leads to shirk then using taliban his logic they should blow it up. They cant even when they know i am right because mohammad did it. So mohammad did shirk omar admits to it he did it because mohammad did and now every monothist muslim does because mohammad did but in reality this stone means nothing but it still is there still is venerated still is worshiped.

[AFG21]

I hope Taliban blow Al Hanif and his hypocrite family to the moon along whith the Saudies LOL

[BarakzaiAbdali]

So far explanation is this stone is not significant it is not in the quran it is not in the prayer muslims just kiss it for show. Question now is why mohammad kissed it and pointed towards it. Muslims then claim it was put there by abraham and his sons. We need independent sources for that that abraham and his sons built the kabba and placed this stone there. On contrary in Arabia there were 4 historical kabbas with four different beaytl stones worshiped as gods by the pagan Arabic people. This stone is meaningless yet it is in the heart of the faith of muslims and part of the most important muslim ritual but it is still just a stone of no importance. It makes no sense. Instead this stone is worshiped and muslims believe it holds power that by kissing it takes away your sins gives you health secures your place in heaven. Muslims try to kiss it touch it lick it but yet it is not important. Still doesnt make sense. That was my point to al hanif if this stone leads to shirk then using taliban his logic they should blow it up. They cant even when they know i am right because mohammad did it. So mohammad did shirk omar admits to it he did it because mohammad did and now every monothist muslim does because mohammad did but in reality this stone means nothing but it still is there still is venerated still is worshiped.

Loooool, wrong Albani Kabulzada/parsiwaan.

You've failed to substantiate your CENTRAL claim, which was that the black rock was an object of worship.

1. Kissing something does not connote worship. For instance, when a grandfather kisses his grand daughter or when that Canadian Imam that was beat down in Saudi kissed the Canadian soil, he was not calling it The God, or a god. For that matter, when you kiss the grave site of Mossoud in Panjshir that does not mean you worship him. As to licking... that seems to be your forte.

2. Your statement regarding torah biblical law supposedly never showing instances of stone use to mark places or worship made you look even dumber with the reference we gave above in regards to Jacob.

3. Your moronic request of referencing anyone else stating it was an Abrahamic house of worship is assinine. BECAUSE no one else except the Bani Israel and the Arabs ascribed existence to Abraham except these two people and that is true to this day. Arabia was isolated to the point where even Alexander did not conquer it. The majority of the sources are Arab sources. Even then, we have the following from Guillame discussing Ishaq's biography of the Prophet:

"They [the rabbis] told that the sole object of the tribe was to destroy him and his army. ‘We know of no other temple in the land which God has chosen for Himself, said they, and if you do what they suggest you and all your men will perish.’ The king asked them what he should do when he got there, and they told him to do what the people of Mecca did: circumambulate the temple, to venerate and honour it, to shave his head, and to behave with all humility until he had left its precincts. The king asked why they too should not do likewise. They replied that it was indeed the temple of their father Abraham, but the idols which the inhabitants had set up round it, and the blood which they shed there, presented an insuperable obstacle. They are unclean polytheists, said they - or words to that effect."

4. Your comparison of the Kabaa to other houses of worship in the surrounding area with these mysterious nonexistent stones is empirically idiotic even in a secular sense as the stone of the kabaa is suspected to be meteorite. In fact, literature from antiquity shows the Kabaah superceded ALL the other supposed equivalents you claim in Arabia:

Gibbons writes:
"The genuine antiquity of Caaba ascends beyond the Christian era: in describing the coast of the Red sea the Greek historian Diodorus has remarked, between the Thamudites and the Sabeans, a famous temple, whose superior sanctity was revered by all the Arabians; the linen of silken veil, which is annually renewed by the Turkish emperor, was first offered by the Homerites, who reigned seven hundred years before the time of Mohammad."

5. Your attempt to read guilt into Omar's statement is nonsensical. Thats why he confirms that Muhammad (S) did not view it as a diety. In fact by the Prophet Muhammad's passing, the canonical form of worship was codified. That is why your attempt to gloss over the Muslim manner of worship and treatment of the stone in its absence is laughable at best and pitiful at worst in terms of your poor scholarship. Omar already knew how to worship Allah (S).

6. There were 360 some idols in the Kabaah that were destroyed by the Prophet. In no annals anywhere is there commentary that the stone itself was one of the idols.

Sorry, compadre, time for you to jump back across the Amu Darya and go here:

http://tajikam.com/

[Karachi]

guys focus on the video, rather then arguing on other topics. It doesn't matter if you are muslim or athiest, we should all agree to preserve historical monuments, shouldn't we?? instead of building toilets over them

[al-arab]

I have not watch the video Karachi posted but it is a well known fact that the Al-Saud family are apostates and are not by ANY MEANS "royal". They are not even related to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

One of the worst thing that has happened in the Arab world in the last 100 years was the removal of the Hashemite family lead by Sayyid Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Makkah and the defeat of the Ikhwan forces against the apostates of Al-Saud family who has only "ruled" for 90 years.

Saudis should not be mentioned in the same context as one single family (Al-Saud).

There is nothing wrong with Saudis, in fact it it our fatherland (Arab's tribes, including myself) and the law is Almighty Allah's law (Shariah)

The only problem is the Al-Saud family not the Saudi people or law.

[ScimitarXEdge]

I completely agree with what the dude with the beard said.

Can't wait until Talibans take over Saudi Arabia and blow up this ugly tower.

Until then, here's pure monotheists destroying an idol :

the Taliban can't even run Afghanistan, nevermind taking over any place.

Sure we can all agree Saudi Arabia's days are numbered, but if you think the Taliban will usher their end you're mentally handicapped and delusiona.

[ScimitarXEdge]

I hope Taliban blow Al Hanif and his hypocrite family to the moon along whith the Saudies LOL

I concur ; we should start having assassination squads in Europe to take out these Wahhabist slaves of Saudi Monarchy like Al Hanif, he says he's against Saudia Arabia but he follows the Saudi belief system.

The same way they deal with others they should be dealt with. After all in Islamic Law we have eye for an eye (qisas)

we should leave their families out of this though, unless they follow his same ideology.

[al-arab]

I concur ; we should start having assassination squads in Europe to take out these Wahhabist slaves of Saudi Monarchy like Al Hanif, he says he's against Saudia Arabia but he follows the Saudi belief system.

The same way they deal with others they should be dealt with. After all in Islamic Law we have eye for an eye (qisas)

we should leave their families out of this though, unless they follow his same ideology.

Let's take it easy here. All Saudis are by no means followers of the apostates and fake "royals" in the form of the Al-Saud family (not even related to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) like Sayyid Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Makkah).

Again, the people are not the problem nor is the law (Shariah) but the apostate rulers (Al-Saud) are.

[Karachi]

Let's take it easy here. All Saudis are by no means followers of the apostates and fake "royals" in the form of the Al-Saud family (not even related to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) like Sayyid Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Makkah).

Again, the people are not the problem nor is the law (Shariah) but the apostate rulers (Al-Saud) are.

your are wrong actually, most saudis respect the royal family, I lived there for 14 years so i know, if they didn't like them, saudis would be protesting against them just like other arab countries, but they are not.

I think the main wrong with saudi arabia is the actually the (wahabhi) belief system, all the destruction in Makkah is backed by the religious system there, The royals are just doing what the religious scholars there are telling them to do, also the contracters are making the money out of the situation. Just watch the video. There are 3 evils working side by side in saudi arabia, The royal family, the Wahabhi system and Greed. All of these are showing their true face in Makkah

[ScimitarXEdge]

Pay closer attention; no one ever argued the people are the problem.


but the Wahhabi Ideology is certainly a problem, this is what Al-Hanif follows.

People who follow his ideology should be publicly executed just as they themselves advocate.

don't tell me you're a Wahhabi too?

[ScimitarXEdge]

.

Saudis should not be mentioned in the same context as one single family (Al-Saud).

you're either fake or you know nothing about Arab history.

The Arab tribes originated from Yemen, and you're 3arab must3arab. you're only 3arab because your ancestors adopted the Arabic language. you're not 3arab bil 2asl