Mvutano Kati ya Uislamu, Historia na Akiolojia

[hamis77]

Mvutano Kati ya Uislamu, Historia na Akiolojia


Uislamu ni mojawapo ya dini kubwa duniani, ukidai chimbuko lake kuwa ni ufunuo wa Mungu mmoja kwa Nabii Muhammad katika karne ya 7 huko Arabia. Hata hivyo, kadiri sayansi ya historia na akiolojia inavyoendelea, tafiti mbalimbali zimeibua changamoto dhidi ya simulizi rasmi za Kiislamu. Leo nitajadili maeneo matano muhimu ambapo historia na akiolojia zinakinzana na simulizi kuu za Uislamu, kwa kutumia ushahidi wa maandiko ya kale, Qur'an, na tafiti za wataalamu.


1️⃣ Mji wa Makka: Mahali pa Mwanzo au Simulizi ya Baadaye?


Uislamu unasema Makka kuwa mji mkuu wa biashara kabla ya Uislamu, na kwamba Abrahamu (Ibrahim) na mwanawe Ismail walijenga Kaaba hapo.


Hakuna ushahidi wa kihistoria unaothibitisha kuwa Makka ilikuwa mji maarufu kabla ya karne ya 7.

Patricia Crone, mwanahistoria mashuhuri, aliandika:

“There is no mention of Mecca in any non-Muslim literature before the rise of Islam.”
(Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam, 1987)


Ramani za Claudius Ptolemy (karne ya 2 BK), hazioneshi Makka, licha ya kutaja miji mingi ya Arabia kama Gerrha na Yathrib (baadaye Madina).


Makka haiwezi kuthibitishwa kihistoria kama kituo kikuu cha biashara kabla ya Uislamu. Inawezekana simulizi hiyo ilitungwa baadaye kuimarisha uhalali wa mji huo katika imani ya Kiislamu.


2️⃣ Kaaba: Nyumba ya Ibrahim au Hekalu la Waquraishi?

Uislamu unasema Kaaba ilijengwa na Ibrahim na Ismail kama mahali pa ibada ya Mungu mmoja. Qur’an inasema:

“Na pale tulipomweka Ibrahimu mahali pa ile Nyumba (tukamwambia): Usimshirikishe chochote na Mimi.”
(Qur'an 22:26)


Biblia na historia kabla ya kuja uislamu haimtaji Ibrahim kama mtu aliyewahi kufika Arabia.

Akiolojia haijawahi kugundua mabaki ya kihistoria ya Kaaba kabla ya Uislamu.

Dan Gibson, katika Quranic Geography (2011):

“There is no archaeological evidence in Mecca that predates the advent of Islam in the 7th century.”


Kaaba iliyopo sasa imefanyiwa marekebisho mengi kiasi kwamba haina mabaki ya kihistoria ya asili.


Simulizi ya Ibrahim kujenga Kaaba haijaungwa mkono na ushahidi wa Biblia , historia wala wa akiolojia,ni utapeli wa waarabu kujipendekeza kwa ibrahimu

3️⃣ Qur’an: Je ni Kitabu Kilichokusanywa Wakati wa Muhammad au Baadaye?

Waislamu wanaamini Qur’an iliteremshwa kwa Muhammad na ikaandikwa wakati wa maisha yake, kisha ikakusanywa wakati wa Abu Bakr na Uthman.


Maandiko ya kale yanaonyesha mabadiliko ya matoleo, na baadhi ya maandiko ya awali hayaendani na Qur’an ya sasa.


Sana'a Manuscripts (Yemen):
Zinazoonesha mabadiliko ya maandishi, mpangilio na hata aya zisizopatikana katika Qur’an ya leo.

Gerd R. Puin, mtaalam wa maandiko ya Kiarabu, alisema:

“The Qur'an is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even at the time of Muhammad.”


Qur’an yenyewe inakubali kuwa watu walikuwa wakibadilishiwa aya

“Aya yoyote tunayoifuta au kuisahaulisha, tunaleta iliyo bora zaidi au iliyo sawa nayo.”
(Qur’an 2:106)


Ushahidi unaonesha Qur’an ilikuwa matokeo ya mchakato wa kihistoria, si ufunuo uliokusanywa kikamilifu wakati wa Muhammad.,Kafanye utafit hata hii Quran ya Leo ni ya mwaka 1920s hapo Chuo cha Al Azhar misri Cairo , Mfalme Fuad alizichoma Quran zote na kuzitupa mto Nile,Kisha akaunda moja ambayo ni hii ya Leo , hata Saudia Arabia hawana manuscript ya Uthman,walibidi mwaka 1985 waikubali hii Quran iliyoundwa hapo Misri chuo cha Al Azhar University chenye mahusihano makubwa na ya Siri na Vatican.


4️⃣ Israa na Miiraj: Safari ya Mbingu au Simulizi ya Baadaye?


Uislamu unasema Muhammad alipelekwa usiku kutoka Makka hadi Msikiti wa Al-Aqsa (Jerusalem), kisha akapaa mbinguni.,ikiwa Muhammad hakuwahi kufika Yerusalemu,

Aya ya Qur'an:

"Subhana alladhi asra bi'abdihi laylan mina al-masjidi al-harami ila al-masjidi al-aqsa..."
(Qur’an 17:1)


Hakuna ushahidi kuwa Msikiti wa Al-Aqsa ulikuwepo wakati huo. Ujenzi wa Al-Aqsa ulianza baada ya mwaka 691 BK.

Qur’an haisemi wazi kwamba safari hiyo ilikuwa ya kimwili au kiroho, wala haitaji jina “Jerusalem”.


Dr. Moshe Sharon, Profesa wa Historia ya Uislamu, anasema:

"There was no mosque in Jerusalem called Al-Aqsa during Muhammad's time. The name was retroactively applied.”


Inaonekana tukio hili lilitungwa baadaye na kuhusianishwa na Jerusalem kwa sababu za kisiasa na kidini.


5️⃣ Kibla ya Mwanzo Ilielekea Wapi?


Awali Waislamu waliswali kuelekea Yerusalemu, kisha Allah akawaamuru kuelekea Makka:

“Basi geuza uso wako upande wa Msikiti Mtakatifu...”
(Qur'an 2:144)



Misikiti ya mwanzo wa Uislamu haielekei Makka, bali inaelekea kaskazini kuelekea Petra (Jordan).

Dan Gibson alichunguza misikiti ya kale kama ule wa Guangzhou (Uchina), Wasit (Iraq), na alikuta kuwa

“Almost all early mosques built in the first century of Islam face Petra, not Mecca.”


Hii inapingana na madai ya kihistoria kuhusu Makka kuwa kibla tangu mwanzo.


Ushahidi wa akiolojia unaonesha kwamba Kibla ya mwanzo haikuwa Makka, jambo linalopingana na simulizi za baadaye za Kiislamu.


Kwa kutumia vyanzo vya historia, akiolojia, maandiko ya kale, na tafiti za wasomi, inaonesha kwamba:

Simulizi ya Makka kama mji wa kale wa kibiashara haithibitiki.

Ibrahim hakuishi Arabia, wa
la hakujenga Kaaba.

Qur’an haikuwa na sura moja tangu mwanzo; mabadiliko yalifanyika baadaye.

Msikiti wa Al-Aqsa haukuwepo wakati wa tukio la Israa.

Kibla ya mwanzo ilikuwa Petra, si Makka.

Na mengine mengi yanaonesha Uislamu ni dini ya kutungwa ,

Ukitaka kujua na kuamini nisemacho unapouchunguza uislamu uweke kwenye mizania ya historia hata usihangaike sana, maana uislamu ni dini mpya imekuja imekuta Kuna historia zipo, imekuta teknolojia ipo na ishaendelea ,imekuta maendeleo ni makubwa .

 

[Le Padrino]

Kama Uislam ni dini ya kutungwa kwa nini kila siku unahangaika nayo kuanzishia thread au kwanini usianzishe nawe ya kwako kama una akili sana?
Unahangaika na wafuasi ambao ni 25% ya binadamu 2.2bn, wewe unafikiri ndiyo una akili kuliko watu wote hao?
Kwa nini usianze kuchunguza asili yako kama huyo baba yako ni wa ukweli au mama yako alimsingizia?
Kuna wasomi wengi awali hawakua wa Kiislam waliosoma na kujua ukweli wakaingia katika Uislam, viongozi wa juu wa dini zote Papa, King of England wanaipa heshima na kumthamini the Most Spiritually Influencial Human, i.e Mtume Muhammad SAW, wewe kwa kukariri hizo document ndio unajiona unajua sana!

 

[Nsibwene]

Mtu mwenuenakikinhaoasiroki inaporolewa hoja. Ni byema sana kutulia nanl kujiuliza, kinacjoansikwa ni kweli. Kuna wako tayari kug'ag'ana na jambo hna uhakika nalo.
Tulia chunguza huenda ikakusaidia sana na hoja hizi. Ukweli Uislamu una maswali mengi kuliko majibu.

Asilimia kibqa ya Waislamu haqaijui Uislamu au Qur' an ndiyo maana wanapimbazwa kikubali Kuna maamuma. Huu una ulaghai mkubwa kukubali wewe uwe maamuma ili ulishwe maneno na wajanja.
Jiulize haya fuatilia uelewe, hasira ya nini, huenda wanakionesha njia iliyo ya kweli na sahihi

 

[Le Padrino]

Mtu mwenuenakikinhaoasiroki inaporolewa hoja. Ni byema sana kutulia nanl kujiuliza, kinacjoansikwa ni kweli. Kuna wako tayari kug'ag'ana na jambo hna uhakika nalo.
Tulia chunguza huenda ikakusaidia sana na hoja hizi. Ukweli Uislamu una maswali mengi kuliko majibu.

Asilimia kibqa ya Waislamu haqaijui Uislamu au Qur' an ndiyo maana wanapimbazwa kikubali Kuna maamuma. Huu una ulaghai mkubwa kukubali wewe uwe maamuma ili ulishwe maneno na wajanja.
Jiulize haya fuatilia uelewe, hasira ya nini, huenda wanakionesha njia iliyo ya kweli na sahihi

Unaelewa hata ulichoandika wewe mwenyewe ??

 

[Fbn]

usiabudu miungu mingine ila mimi?.
kwa nini wakristo wanaabudu msalaba.
kwa nini waislamu wanaabudu kabaa kwa kulizunguka.

 

[KING KIGODA]

Mtu mwenuenakikinhaoasiroki inaporolewa hoja. Ni byema sana kutulia nanl kujiuliza, kinacjoansikwa ni kweli. Kuna wako tayari kug'ag'ana na jambo hna uhakika nalo.
Tulia chunguza huenda ikakusaidia sana na hoja hizi. Ukweli Uislamu una maswali mengi kuliko majibu.

Asilimia kibqa ya Waislamu haqaijui Uislamu au Qur' an ndiyo maana wanapimbazwa kikubali Kuna maamuma. Huu una ulaghai mkubwa kukubali wewe uwe maamuma ili ulishwe maneno na wajanja.
Jiulize haya fuatilia uelewe, hasira ya nini, huenda wanakionesha njia iliyo ya kweli na sahihi

Aiseee!

 

[MK254]

Shukrani sana jamaa, unatuelimisha sana kuhusu huu uzombi

 

[Ralphryder]

Kama Uislam ni dini ya kutungwa kwa nini kila siku unahangaika nayo kuanzishia thread au kwanini usianzishe nawe ya kwako kama una akili sana?
Unahangaika na wafuasi ambao ni 25% ya binadamu 2.2bn, wewe unafikiri ndiyo una akili kuliko watu wote hao?
Kwa nini usianze kuchunguza asili yako kama huyo baba yako ni wa ukweli au mama yako alimsingizia?
Kuna wasomi wengi awali hawakua wa Kiislam waliosoma na kujua ukweli wakaingia katika Uislam, viongozi wa juu wa dini zote Papa, King of England wanaipa heshima na kumthamini the Most Spiritually Influencial Human, i.e Mtume Muhammad SAW, wewe kwa kukariri hizo document ndio unajiona unajua sana!

Usipanic, mpe jibu kwa hoja, Acha kuwaza kimakobaz tu.

 

[Le Padrino]

Usipanic, mpe jibu kwa hoja, Acha kuwaza kimakobaz tu.

Hakuna aliyepanic, jamaa kila mada anayoanzisha ni hiyo hiyo anatumia tu heading tofauti. Hana content mpya ambayo itamsumbua mtu yeyote anayejua na amshajibiwa kila sehemu, anajaza MBs tu, sijui kupata scores! Sugu anasema anamaliza miti tu, karatasi nyiingi
#By the way, vazi kuu la Yesu lilikuwa Sandals(sendroz!) au makubazi/kobazi ambazo mapadre wengi wanavaa pamoja na majoho!

 

[Ralphryder]

Hakuna aliyepanic, jamaa kila mada anayoanzisha ni hiyo hiyo anatumia tu heading tofauti. Hana content mpya ambayo itamsumbua mtu yeyote anayejua na amshajibiwa kila sehemu, anajaza MBs tu, sijui kupata scores! Sugu anasema anamaliza miti tu, karatasi nyiingi
#By the way, vazi kuu la Yesu lilikuwa Sandals(sendroz!) au makubazi/kobazi ambazo mapadre wengi wanavaa pamoja na majoho!

Ulimwona nazo?

 

[Boutafrica]

Mvutano Kati ya Uislamu, Historia na Akiolojia


Uislamu ni mojawapo ya dini kubwa duniani, ukidai chimbuko lake kuwa ni ufunuo wa Mungu mmoja kwa Nabii Muhammad katika karne ya 7 huko Arabia. Hata hivyo, kadiri sayansi ya historia na akiolojia inavyoendelea, tafiti mbalimbali zimeibua changamoto dhidi ya simulizi rasmi za Kiislamu. Leo nitajadili maeneo matano muhimu ambapo historia na akiolojia zinakinzana na simulizi kuu za Uislamu, kwa kutumia ushahidi wa maandiko ya kale, Qur'an, na tafiti za wataalamu.


1️⃣ Mji wa Makka: Mahali pa Mwanzo au Simulizi ya Baadaye?


Uislamu unasema Makka kuwa mji mkuu wa biashara kabla ya Uislamu, na kwamba Abrahamu (Ibrahim) na mwanawe Ismail walijenga Kaaba hapo.


Hakuna ushahidi wa kihistoria unaothibitisha kuwa Makka ilikuwa mji maarufu kabla ya karne ya 7.

Patricia Crone, mwanahistoria mashuhuri, aliandika:

“There is no mention of Mecca in any non-Muslim literature before the rise of Islam.”
(Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam, 1987)


Ramani za Claudius Ptolemy (karne ya 2 BK), hazioneshi Makka, licha ya kutaja miji mingi ya Arabia kama Gerrha na Yathrib (baadaye Madina).


Makka haiwezi kuthibitishwa kihistoria kama kituo kikuu cha biashara kabla ya Uislamu. Inawezekana simulizi hiyo ilitungwa baadaye kuimarisha uhalali wa mji huo katika imani ya Kiislamu.


2️⃣ Kaaba: Nyumba ya Ibrahim au Hekalu la Waquraishi?

Uislamu unasema Kaaba ilijengwa na Ibrahim na Ismail kama mahali pa ibada ya Mungu mmoja. Qur’an inasema:

“Na pale tulipomweka Ibrahimu mahali pa ile Nyumba (tukamwambia): Usimshirikishe chochote na Mimi.”
(Qur'an 22:26)


Biblia na historia kabla ya kuja uislamu haimtaji Ibrahim kama mtu aliyewahi kufika Arabia.

Akiolojia haijawahi kugundua mabaki ya kihistoria ya Kaaba kabla ya Uislamu.

Dan Gibson, katika Quranic Geography (2011):

“There is no archaeological evidence in Mecca that predates the advent of Islam in the 7th century.”


Kaaba iliyopo sasa imefanyiwa marekebisho mengi kiasi kwamba haina mabaki ya kihistoria ya asili.


Simulizi ya Ibrahim kujenga Kaaba haijaungwa mkono na ushahidi wa Biblia , historia wala wa akiolojia,ni utapeli wa waarabu kujipendekeza kwa ibrahimu

3️⃣ Qur’an: Je ni Kitabu Kilichokusanywa Wakati wa Muhammad au Baadaye?

Waislamu wanaamini Qur’an iliteremshwa kwa Muhammad na ikaandikwa wakati wa maisha yake, kisha ikakusanywa wakati wa Abu Bakr na Uthman.


Maandiko ya kale yanaonyesha mabadiliko ya matoleo, na baadhi ya maandiko ya awali hayaendani na Qur’an ya sasa.


Sana'a Manuscripts (Yemen):
Zinazoonesha mabadiliko ya maandishi, mpangilio na hata aya zisizopatikana katika Qur’an ya leo.

Gerd R. Puin, mtaalam wa maandiko ya Kiarabu, alisema:

“The Qur'an is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even at the time of Muhammad.”


Qur’an yenyewe inakubali kuwa watu walikuwa wakibadilishiwa aya

“Aya yoyote tunayoifuta au kuisahaulisha, tunaleta iliyo bora zaidi au iliyo sawa nayo.”
(Qur’an 2:106)


Ushahidi unaonesha Qur’an ilikuwa matokeo ya mchakato wa kihistoria, si ufunuo uliokusanywa kikamilifu wakati wa Muhammad.,Kafanye utafit hata hii Quran ya Leo ni ya mwaka 1920s hapo Chuo cha Al Azhar misri Cairo , Mfalme Fuad alizichoma Quran zote na kuzitupa mto Nile,Kisha akaunda moja ambayo ni hii ya Leo , hata Saudia Arabia hawana manuscript ya Uthman,walibidi mwaka 1985 waikubali hii Quran iliyoundwa hapo Misri chuo cha Al Azhar University chenye mahusihano makubwa na ya Siri na Vatican.


4️⃣ Israa na Miiraj: Safari ya Mbingu au Simulizi ya Baadaye?


Uislamu unasema Muhammad alipelekwa usiku kutoka Makka hadi Msikiti wa Al-Aqsa (Jerusalem), kisha akapaa mbinguni.,ikiwa Muhammad hakuwahi kufika Yerusalemu,

Aya ya Qur'an:

"Subhana alladhi asra bi'abdihi laylan mina al-masjidi al-harami ila al-masjidi al-aqsa..."
(Qur’an 17:1)


Hakuna ushahidi kuwa Msikiti wa Al-Aqsa ulikuwepo wakati huo. Ujenzi wa Al-Aqsa ulianza baada ya mwaka 691 BK.

Qur’an haisemi wazi kwamba safari hiyo ilikuwa ya kimwili au kiroho, wala haitaji jina “Jerusalem”.


Dr. Moshe Sharon, Profesa wa Historia ya Uislamu, anasema:

"There was no mosque in Jerusalem called Al-Aqsa during Muhammad's time. The name was retroactively applied.”


Inaonekana tukio hili lilitungwa baadaye na kuhusianishwa na Jerusalem kwa sababu za kisiasa na kidini.


5️⃣ Kibla ya Mwanzo Ilielekea Wapi?


Awali Waislamu waliswali kuelekea Yerusalemu, kisha Allah akawaamuru kuelekea Makka:

“Basi geuza uso wako upande wa Msikiti Mtakatifu...”
(Qur'an 2:144)



Misikiti ya mwanzo wa Uislamu haielekei Makka, bali inaelekea kaskazini kuelekea Petra (Jordan).

Dan Gibson alichunguza misikiti ya kale kama ule wa Guangzhou (Uchina), Wasit (Iraq), na alikuta kuwa

“Almost all early mosques built in the first century of Islam face Petra, not Mecca.”


Hii inapingana na madai ya kihistoria kuhusu Makka kuwa kibla tangu mwanzo.


Ushahidi wa akiolojia unaonesha kwamba Kibla ya mwanzo haikuwa Makka, jambo linalopingana na simulizi za baadaye za Kiislamu.


Kwa kutumia vyanzo vya historia, akiolojia, maandiko ya kale, na tafiti za wasomi, inaonesha kwamba:

Simulizi ya Makka kama mji wa kale wa kibiashara haithibitiki.

Ibrahim hakuishi Arabia, wa
la hakujenga Kaaba.

Qur’an haikuwa na sura moja tangu mwanzo; mabadiliko yalifanyika baadaye.

Msikiti wa Al-Aqsa haukuwepo wakati wa tukio la Israa.

Kibla ya mwanzo ilikuwa Petra, si Makka.

Na mengine mengi yanaonesha Uislamu ni dini ya kutungwa ,

Ukitaka kujua na kuamini nisemacho unapouchunguza uislamu uweke kwenye mizania ya historia hata usihangaike sana, maana uislamu ni dini mpya imekuja imekuta Kuna historia zipo, imekuta teknolojia ipo na ishaendelea ,imekuta maendeleo ni makubwa .

Huna mpya wewe,na hakuna Hata anaehangaika na wewe sshv,tushakujua wewe una chuki imekukaa kifuani so unajitahidi kupambana uitoe kifuani ili usikie wepesi....wewe ni mweupe tu huna lolote kazi kujaza server za watu maandishi meeengi utumbo mtupu

 

[Le Padrino]

Ulimwona nazo?

ni vazi la kitume kuanzia kwa kina Ibrahim, Moses na wengineo na ndio limerithiwa na viongozi -priests, monks, imams and rabbis- wa imani zote kuanzia Uyahudi , Ukristo mpaka Uislam kuonyesha simplicity na humility na connection kwa wafuasi

 

[Ralphryder]

ni vazi la kitume kuanzia kwa kina Ibrahim, Moses na wengineo na ndio limerithiwa na viongozi -priests, monks, imams and rabbis- wa imani zote kuanzia Uyahudi , Ukristo mpaka Uislam kuonyesha simplicity na humility na connection kwa wafuasi

Hujajibu swali.

 

[Le Padrino]

Hujajibu swali.

Marko 6:9

 

[Lamborgini]

kama imetungwa inawezaje kuwa na wafuasi 1b plus duniani mkuu si rahis hivyo,kuna watu kibao waliunda dini zao ila zikafeli kama aum,raelian. Anyway ni opinion.

 

[650]

usiabudu miungu mingine ila mimi?.
kwa nini wakristo wanaabudu msalaba.
kwa nini waislamu wanaabudu kabaa kwa kulizunguka.

Mkuu hatuabudu kaaba

 

[Che mittoga]

Mkuu hatuabudu kaaba

Ila mnafanya hivi na imekatazwa na Mungu
...........
Mambo ya Walawi 26:1 Msifanye sanamu yo yote, wala msijisimamishie sanamu ya kuchonga, wala mnara,
👉wala msiweke jiwe lo lote lililochorwa katika nchi yenu ili kulisujudia; kwa kuwa mimi ndimi Bwana, Mungu wenu.
.......
Mnafanya hivyo kwa sababu gani ?

 

[Jagina]

Mvutano Kati ya Uislamu, Historia na Akiolojia


Uislamu ni mojawapo ya dini kubwa duniani, ukidai chimbuko lake kuwa ni ufunuo wa Mungu mmoja kwa Nabii Muhammad katika karne ya 7 huko Arabia. Hata hivyo, kadiri sayansi ya historia na akiolojia inavyoendelea, tafiti mbalimbali zimeibua changamoto dhidi ya simulizi rasmi za Kiislamu. Leo nitajadili maeneo matano muhimu ambapo historia na akiolojia zinakinzana na simulizi kuu za Uislamu, kwa kutumia ushahidi wa maandiko ya kale, Qur'an, na tafiti za wataalamu.


1️⃣ Mji wa Makka: Mahali pa Mwanzo au Simulizi ya Baadaye?


Uislamu unasema Makka kuwa mji mkuu wa biashara kabla ya Uislamu, na kwamba Abrahamu (Ibrahim) na mwanawe Ismail walijenga Kaaba hapo.


Hakuna ushahidi wa kihistoria unaothibitisha kuwa Makka ilikuwa mji maarufu kabla ya karne ya 7.

Patricia Crone, mwanahistoria mashuhuri, aliandika:

“There is no mention of Mecca in any non-Muslim literature before the rise of Islam.”
(Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam, 1987)


Ramani za Claudius Ptolemy (karne ya 2 BK), hazioneshi Makka, licha ya kutaja miji mingi ya Arabia kama Gerrha na Yathrib (baadaye Madina).


Makka haiwezi kuthibitishwa kihistoria kama kituo kikuu cha biashara kabla ya Uislamu. Inawezekana simulizi hiyo ilitungwa baadaye kuimarisha uhalali wa mji huo katika imani ya Kiislamu.


2️⃣ Kaaba: Nyumba ya Ibrahim au Hekalu la Waquraishi?

Uislamu unasema Kaaba ilijengwa na Ibrahim na Ismail kama mahali pa ibada ya Mungu mmoja. Qur’an inasema:

“Na pale tulipomweka Ibrahimu mahali pa ile Nyumba (tukamwambia): Usimshirikishe chochote na Mimi.”
(Qur'an 22:26)


Biblia na historia kabla ya kuja uislamu haimtaji Ibrahim kama mtu aliyewahi kufika Arabia.

Akiolojia haijawahi kugundua mabaki ya kihistoria ya Kaaba kabla ya Uislamu.

Dan Gibson, katika Quranic Geography (2011):

“There is no archaeological evidence in Mecca that predates the advent of Islam in the 7th century.”


Kaaba iliyopo sasa imefanyiwa marekebisho mengi kiasi kwamba haina mabaki ya kihistoria ya asili.


Simulizi ya Ibrahim kujenga Kaaba haijaungwa mkono na ushahidi wa Biblia , historia wala wa akiolojia,ni utapeli wa waarabu kujipendekeza kwa ibrahimu

3️⃣ Qur’an: Je ni Kitabu Kilichokusanywa Wakati wa Muhammad au Baadaye?

Waislamu wanaamini Qur’an iliteremshwa kwa Muhammad na ikaandikwa wakati wa maisha yake, kisha ikakusanywa wakati wa Abu Bakr na Uthman.


Maandiko ya kale yanaonyesha mabadiliko ya matoleo, na baadhi ya maandiko ya awali hayaendani na Qur’an ya sasa.


Sana'a Manuscripts (Yemen):
Zinazoonesha mabadiliko ya maandishi, mpangilio na hata aya zisizopatikana katika Qur’an ya leo.

Gerd R. Puin, mtaalam wa maandiko ya Kiarabu, alisema:

“The Qur'an is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even at the time of Muhammad.”


Qur’an yenyewe inakubali kuwa watu walikuwa wakibadilishiwa aya

“Aya yoyote tunayoifuta au kuisahaulisha, tunaleta iliyo bora zaidi au iliyo sawa nayo.”
(Qur’an 2:106)


Ushahidi unaonesha Qur’an ilikuwa matokeo ya mchakato wa kihistoria, si ufunuo uliokusanywa kikamilifu wakati wa Muhammad.,Kafanye utafit hata hii Quran ya Leo ni ya mwaka 1920s hapo Chuo cha Al Azhar misri Cairo , Mfalme Fuad alizichoma Quran zote na kuzitupa mto Nile,Kisha akaunda moja ambayo ni hii ya Leo , hata Saudia Arabia hawana manuscript ya Uthman,walibidi mwaka 1985 waikubali hii Quran iliyoundwa hapo Misri chuo cha Al Azhar University chenye mahusihano makubwa na ya Siri na Vatican.


4️⃣ Israa na Miiraj: Safari ya Mbingu au Simulizi ya Baadaye?


Uislamu unasema Muhammad alipelekwa usiku kutoka Makka hadi Msikiti wa Al-Aqsa (Jerusalem), kisha akapaa mbinguni.,ikiwa Muhammad hakuwahi kufika Yerusalemu,

Aya ya Qur'an:

"Subhana alladhi asra bi'abdihi laylan mina al-masjidi al-harami ila al-masjidi al-aqsa..."
(Qur’an 17:1)


Hakuna ushahidi kuwa Msikiti wa Al-Aqsa ulikuwepo wakati huo. Ujenzi wa Al-Aqsa ulianza baada ya mwaka 691 BK.

Qur’an haisemi wazi kwamba safari hiyo ilikuwa ya kimwili au kiroho, wala haitaji jina “Jerusalem”.


Dr. Moshe Sharon, Profesa wa Historia ya Uislamu, anasema:

"There was no mosque in Jerusalem called Al-Aqsa during Muhammad's time. The name was retroactively applied.”


Inaonekana tukio hili lilitungwa baadaye na kuhusianishwa na Jerusalem kwa sababu za kisiasa na kidini.


5️⃣ Kibla ya Mwanzo Ilielekea Wapi?


Awali Waislamu waliswali kuelekea Yerusalemu, kisha Allah akawaamuru kuelekea Makka:

“Basi geuza uso wako upande wa Msikiti Mtakatifu...”
(Qur'an 2:144)



Misikiti ya mwanzo wa Uislamu haielekei Makka, bali inaelekea kaskazini kuelekea Petra (Jordan).

Dan Gibson alichunguza misikiti ya kale kama ule wa Guangzhou (Uchina), Wasit (Iraq), na alikuta kuwa

“Almost all early mosques built in the first century of Islam face Petra, not Mecca.”


Hii inapingana na madai ya kihistoria kuhusu Makka kuwa kibla tangu mwanzo.


Ushahidi wa akiolojia unaonesha kwamba Kibla ya mwanzo haikuwa Makka, jambo linalopingana na simulizi za baadaye za Kiislamu.


Kwa kutumia vyanzo vya historia, akiolojia, maandiko ya kale, na tafiti za wasomi, inaonesha kwamba:

Simulizi ya Makka kama mji wa kale wa kibiashara haithibitiki.

Ibrahim hakuishi Arabia, wa
la hakujenga Kaaba.

Qur’an haikuwa na sura moja tangu mwanzo; mabadiliko yalifanyika baadaye.

Msikiti wa Al-Aqsa haukuwepo wakati wa tukio la Israa.

Kibla ya mwanzo ilikuwa Petra, si Makka.

Na mengine mengi yanaonesha Uislamu ni dini ya kutungwa ,

Ukitaka kujua na kuamini nisemacho unapouchunguza uislamu uweke kwenye mizania ya historia hata usihangaike sana, maana uislamu ni dini mpya imekuja imekuta Kuna historia zipo, imekuta teknolojia ipo na ishaendelea ,imekuta maendeleo ni ma

Muslims for quite a long time has interpreted Isaiah 29:12 as a typological prefiguration of Prophet Mohammed (SAAW) and specifically of his first revelation that took the form of a nocturnal vision when he slept while being inside the cave called "the cave of Hira" (ghar Hira), located in a mountain called by that name (Jabal Hira).

However, the evidence that Muslims provided for this claim was yet too scanty and built only on Islamic sources.

In consequence, Muslims have some difficulties to defend the validity of their position in polemic with Christian apologists like David Wood or Sam Shamoun who demand to read Isaiah 29:12 in its context.

This six-part series of extensive research, which is in constant progress, will confirm with profound insight the legitimacy of the Muslim claim since in Isaiah 29, there are many, still recognized details that - after expounding them properly - bears a clear testimony of considerable importance relating to the first moment and exact location where the future mission of Prophet Mohammed (SAAW) would start.

Therefore, I would like to introduce some of these still not known and unexplored details that are worthy to discuss. Below are some thoughts concerning Isaiah 29:11-12 taken from my up-coming book written originally in Polish under the title: "Znaki i Proroctwa Biblijne: Starotestamentowe Przepowiednie o Mekkańskim Proroku".

Before we enter into the topic, we need to establish few important facts about the reliability of the Bible. It is widely accepted among biblical researchers (including conservatives) that the Bible, in the form we have it today, is a product of constant editing from the earliest stages of its composition to its definitive canonization.

One of the serious problems is associated with the chronology of genealogies and events described by the Old Testament writers.

For example, numbers in chrono-genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 were purposely manipulated in specific ways causing date inflation and downstream chronological difficulties (See L. Cosner & R. Carter, Textual Traditions and Biblical Chronology, JC 29/2 (2015), pp. 99-105).

Furthermore,, according to the contemporary biblical scholarship dealing with the textual criticism, there is no such thing as chronological order of biblical narratives. Certain portions of the text have suffered a deep scribal rearrangement.

For instance, there are clear discontinuities in the narratological chain, noted by scholars in various parts of Deutero-Isaiah corpus, that makes the relationship between the texts irrational (See e.g. Continuity and Discontinuity: Chronological and Thematic Development in Isaiah 40-66, eds. Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer & Hans M. Barstad, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014).

This sort of redaction concerning the chronology of biblical narratives is by no means unusual, and it has already found evidence through implementing an empirical method (e.g. Archaeology). According to David A. Glatt, these editorial changes in narrative's chronology, are to be divided into two categories:

(1) accounts of the same event from both before and after the displacement occurred;

(2) textual or historical data which point to an event's original setting and with which the person responsible for displacing the event must have been acquainted.

Motivations for the empirically-derived displacements fall into three main categories: ideological, thematic, and exegetical (For more, see Glatt's paper thesis under the title Chronological displacement in Biblical and related literature, [Ph.D. Thesis], University of Pennsylvania, 1991).

Recent scholars got enough proof that the author of the Book of Isaiah (who according to a certain group of scholars was paradoxically not even Isaiah!) have interrupted or modified the original chronologic sequence of biblical data (i.e. the right placement of a particular narrative).

It seems that the editor who restructured the original text, picked up various stories and then blended them with others - not always in their chronological order - to create his own background information which in turn would correspond to his theological-political purposes (whatever his belief was). Redactional-Critical studies identifies some cases in the Hebrew Bible where syntactic construction of the storyline is violated by redactor's disruptive information embedded in the text (e.g. fictional background) called otherwise a "parenthesis" (See G. E. Lier, Disruption in Biblical Narrative as Mental Stimulant for Inner-Biblical Interpretation, JS 22, 2013, pp. 522-536; T. Zewi, Parenthesis in Biblical Hebrew, SSLL 50, Leiden: Brill, 2007).

Also, biblical scholars now fully recognize the fact that the text of Isaiah, as well as of other Old Testament books (e.g. Leviticus, Numbers, Samuel, Kings, Jeremiah etc.), were gradually expanded by incorporating new materials (See Evidence of Editing: Growth and Change of Texts in the Hebrew Bible, eds. R. Müller, J. Pakkala & Bas ter H. Romeny, Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 2014).

Interpolations not only artificially lengthen the original material but also disturb, inter alia, the natural rhythm the poem or verse. Inappropriately edited text often becomes factually incoherent with the rest of the text and this leads to many contradictions. Such disharmony is not limited to one book but it applies to the whole Bible.

The tragic thing, however, is that most - if not all - prophecies were rewritten over and over again which eventually caused a separation from their proper places and in effect, they hold no longer the original contextual framework in relation to the previous narrative setting intended by the first author (See Changes in Scripture: Rewriting and Interpreting Authoritative Traditions in the Second Temple Period, eds. H. von Weissenberg, J. Pakkala & M. Marttila, BZAW 419, Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 2011; with reference to our topic see especially: Reinhard G. Kratz, "Rewriting Isaiah: The Case of Isaiah 28-31," in: Prophecy and Prophets in Ancient Israel: Proceedings of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar, ed. J. Day, London, NY: T & T Clark International, 2010, pp. 245-266).

Regarding the actual text formation and literary structure of Isaiah 29 (which is our main issue), Daniel J. Stulec, another biblical scholar, in his doctoral thesis, says that Isaiah's sections divided as 29:1-14 and 29:15-24 "have almost certainly come together through a complex process of composition, expansion, and redaction." (See Daniel J. Stulec, History and Hope: The Agrarian Wisdom of Isaiah 28-35, [Ph.D. Thesis], Duke University, 2017, p. 14).

Facing all of this stuff (I just mentioned only a few), we have no idea what was the original autograph of the biblical scriptures. That's why scholars today from all around the world are obliged to work so hard to reconstruct at least the earliest form of the biblical text since the original one is lost, and perhaps will never be recovered.

I have quoted these scholarly references partly in response to those self-opinionated Christian and Jewish apologists who still blindly believe in the infallibility of the Bible, those who thinks they know without a doubt(?)