Tag Archives: ISIS

In Ancient Egypt, at any given moment, there was never one Egyptian Religion

Excerpts from my correspondence with a Tunisian reader about the ‘Ancient Egyptian Religion’

Question

Many thanks dear Friend for your long email,

I’m from Sfax, and by chance I worked about Ramsenites a kind of stories widely spread in north africa. You are specialized also in old languages and I have a question about the representation in old egypt about Amoon sun-rise coming from the east Arabia? with smell of perfume and myrrh, is it true that rulers of old egypt were from yemen? So by the way what is the new traduction of this word in hieroglyphic (Cf. enclosed)

Response

You ask me about Ancient Egypt and Amun of Thebes.

I believe sometimes many Orientalists trying to do the best did the worst! And the result is that they confused the rest of the world.

So, I fully agree with Edward Said’s criticism and even I wrote about it.

I feel sorry that Egyptologists flooded the world with wrong terms, really! No bad intentions involved, but when someone is not attentive and watchful, misreading is caused with incalculable consequences. Very simple terms are very mistaken indeed. You say ‘Ancient Egyptian Religion’ (I don’t speak of you but in general): first mistake!!!!

Today, we distinguish Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.

In Ancient Egypt, at any given moment, there was never one Egyptian Religion.

Different priesthoods developed tremendously divergent interpretations of the Divine Order, the Spiritual Universe, the Creation, the Material Universe, and the human society; in doing so, they had contradictory world views, moral and spiritual principles, and narratives; they then conceptualized the reality in opposite manners.

Yes, there is one Egyptian Civilization, one Egyptian Culture, but many Egyptian religions; and by this of course I don’t mean Aten, Akhenaten and the Atonic Religion, but the systems that antedated Akhenaten for more than two millennia and which survived the Amarna revolution.

Aten.png

Akhenaten,_Nefertiti_and_their_children.jpg

There were different religious (and imperial) capitals, opposite centers of spiritual-religious systems, and conflicting priests and followers.

It is very wrong to describe the totality of the Ancient Egyptian religions as polytheistic. There were several monotheistic systems for which there were no gods, but one God and many attributes of God. This is very different from what modern concise presentations of the Ancient Egyptian faiths state. And of course there were also polytheistic systems in Ancient Egypt, and there were constant clashes among the followers of the opposite systems. In those fights, all the monotheists sided together against all the polytheists, but this does not mean that there was just one monotheistic and one polytheistic systems; there were more.

Because of this, initiation rites helped all those priesthoods solidify and perpetuate themselves through the ages by hiring new adepts who would then become high priests, generals, land lords, prominent noblemen, top administrators, and pharaohs.

And by using a sophisticated language, which contained a vast field of semiotics, they set up systems of perception and understanding that were impressively and incredibly multilayered: these supreme spiritual and mental constructions that are unmatched by today’s top scientific disciplines, philosophies and ideologies were the original forms of the Ancient Myth.

Then, an agricultural laborer perceived one myth as x; but an initiated priest, scribe, general, administrator perceived the same myth (i.e. the same narrative) as x2; then a higher initiate perceived the same myth as x3; an even higher initiate as x4; a great mystic as x105; and the great high priest as x100.

The Heliopolitan system (Ennead) was a markedly monotheistic system in its origin and until the crepuscular times of the Egyptian civilization.

ennead.jpg

If one only studies the names of the divine aspects that are the elements of this system, one understands immediately that they were not conceived as ‘gods’; example: Osiris, Wser, meant ‘the Well Being’. Of course, it was cut to pieces by Satan, i.e. Seth; and it disappeared among men. This is exactly what the Bible and the Quran describe as our Forefathers’ expulsion from the Paradise. The Well Being is not anymore with us. But the Biblical and Quranic descriptions are lower, poorer and weaker.

osiris.jpg

Ignorant or devious scholars of our times insist that Hathor is a … goddess! How silly! This aspect of the Divine Order may well have been perceived as a ‘goddess’ in late times of the Egyptian civilization (such as the 1st millennium BCE), but in the original myth – which represents the absolutely truthful perception of the spiritual and the material reality – Hathor was not a goddess. How silly is it to consider as ‘goddess’ an entity whose name in Egyptian Hieroglyphics meant exactly “the House of Horus”?

hathor.jpg

The same concerns the Hermupolitan system (Ogdoad).

Ogdoad.jpg

Contrarily, the Memphitic theology (around Ptah) was totally polytheistic.

Ptah.png

And so was the Theban Trinity, which is the aboriginal Trinity in the History of the Mankind.

amunritual.jpg

As I already said, there were many clashes among the various Ancient Egyptian systematic theologies; as the different religious – spiritual systems were structured with impenetrable temples, initiates, adepts and followers, the only chance to harm an opposite system was either to elaborate composite forms of the Divine (in order to acquire the credibility of another theological system’s element and in the process alter the original faith of the system in which the targeted element belonged), such as Amun Ra (of the Theban priesthood), or to attribute deviate characteristics or different, degraded perception to an element of the opposite priesthood’s system.

In this manner, and with the progressive rise of polytheism, the earlier aspects of the Divine ‘became’ gods for most – but all – of the Ancient Egyptians during Ancient Egypt’s later periods.

But at the very original stage, anthropomorphism and zoomorphism in the conception of the divine world related to the lower spiritual (or astral) sphere and had nothing to do with primitive tribes’ totems and polytheistic rituals, as materialist propagandists claim while impersonating professors and academicians to the detriment of the Mankind.

amun.jpg

Only deep and extensive experience in the spiritual spheres can allow someone understand what it means – as example – that the Divine Aspect of Wisdom (i.e. the Wisdom of God) has to represented as a human’s body with an ibis’ head (like Djhawty – Thot). Material(istic) scholarship is genuinely incapacitated to understand – let alone explain – this theoretical approach, which originates entirely from spiritual spheres.

Thoth.jpg

So, what you ask me about Amun Re is a later (dating back to the times of the New Empire at the middle of the 2nd millennium BCE), composite form and has no originality in the 3rd millennium. In its origin, Amun as a Theban polytheistic god has no relationship with solar ideologies. When the Theban priests composed the form Amun Re, they did it in order to set up an imperial ideology and doctrine, while at the same time isolating / alienating the Heliopolitan monotheistic priesthood from the imperial headquarters at all levels, spiritual, theological, administrative and local. During most of the 2nd half of the 2nd millennium BCE, Iwnw (Heliopolis) was a marginal and destitute religious center; however, it managed to keep polytheists at bay.

Amun Re certainly appropriated solar attributes of the Heliopolitan Ra, and was therefore said to rise in the Orient.

 

Advertisements

Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Misperceptions – Part I

Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Misperceptions – Part I

 

By Prof. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis

 

I realize quite well the troublesome situation in which people in the West are. Their trouble is basically due to ignorance, and the ignorance of the people in the West is multi-leveled.

People in the West don’t know what happened in the 14-century long history of the Muslim nations – which can be understood to some extent, because not all the people will become historians in their daily life. Yet, people in the West had to have got a brief diagram and the diagram had to be correct. This is about the past; and it is the first point. The second point is even worse.

z7

WESTERN IGNORANCE OF THE MUSLIM WORLD

At the same time, people in the West don’t know what truly happens now in the Muslim World, and this cannot be understood because there are many correspondents, journalists, analysts, writers, specialized experts, etc. People in the West get only a wrong picture, a very partly and absolutely superficial picture of what truly happens in the Muslim World now. Then, the wrong picture is that of a calm realm – an image that duly plunges the Western people into anything from indifference to apathy; the consequence is that all of the people in the West feel calm and they thus ignore the reality, which – put in exact terms – is that an enormous tsunami is coming against them. In fact, the earthquake that triggered the tsunami already happened.

This is not a fresh understanding for me; I already knew it long before I wrote my articles in favor of Pope Benedict XVI and against the false Muslims who angrily attacked him in 2006.

 

For reference, I herewith mention several titles:

Benedictus XVI may not be right, but today’s Muslims are islamically wrong!

https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t328943/

Lord Carey, Benedictus XVI, and today’s decayed Islam

http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/viamedia/2006/10/on-the-amish.html

What Benedict XVI should say, admonishing Muslim Ambassadors?

http://www.afroarticles.com/article-dashboard/Article/What-Benedict-XVI-should-say–admonishing-Muslim-ambassadors/18626

Can Benedict XVI bring Peace and Concord?

http://www.afroarticles.com/article-dashboard/Article/Can-Benedict-XVI-bring-Peace-and-Concord-/18625

 

But now, it is 2016, and the entire West seems to be engulfed in the same false representation of the Muslim World which is quite dangerous for global peace and safety.

 

There is a top issue that must be clear beforehand; for every problem, for every subject there is a dual reality. The basic and therefore lower level of reality is the problem itself, the subject in question. The most important and therefore upper level of reality is your perception of the problem.

 

Whatever the problem may be, if your perception of it is true, accurate and exact, you have the intellect to eliminate the problem.

 

However, even if the problem is minor, but your perception of it is false, confused and misplaced, your own calamitous perception of the minor problem will certainly deteriorate it, aggravate your condition, and trigger a very dangerous development altogether.

 

Quite unfortunately, the Western World’s perception of today’s Islamic (Muslim) World is totally erroneous. Even worse, it is not based on the true data.
To my eyes, it is as if one mysterious and unseen force, an invisible hand, tries to prevent the Western World’s accurate and comprehensive information on the subject. 
THE MYTH OF THE POLITICALLY CORRECT LANGUAGE MUST TAKE A DEAD END
The very few intellectuals and academics, who happen to write about the reality, get either defamed or discredited or marginalized or concealed. This is the case for instance of Kamel Daoud (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamel_Daoud) who focused on the sexual behavior as attested in several Muslim societies of today, i.e. a small but still essential part of today’s Muslims’ behavioral system.
Those few, who write about the abysmal reality of today’s Muslim World, get systematically attacked by the “guardians of the system” (e.g. academics, intellectuals, politicians and statesmen) who seem to have an interest in keeping the Western World (and the outright majority of the people in the rest of the world) in mysteries. To impose their fake, vicious and catastrophic legitimacy, the “guardians of the system” impose the myth of political correctness, a most repugnant idiocy geared to besot many. Kamel Daoud happened to write an insightful about the reasons that caused the numerous and terrible cases of sexual harassment in the streets and the squares of Cologne, Germany during New Year’s Eve (an absurd situation with more than 600 cases in just one … night). Then, a group of academics (all Western and seemingly Christian) specializing in Islam and the Orient in general wrote against him in a provocative manner in order to discredit him and keep the people in darkness about what truly exists in most of the Muslim World.

 

These cruel masters of falsehood are the Western World’s worst enemies, and their actions must be placed under surveillance. Any wrong approach to the reality of today’s Islamic World has a direct impact on the perception of this world in the West, and therefore affects the Western World’s decision making process with respect to the system from where the real, evident and grave danger originates. These criminal and false doctors and academics should not therefore be held responsible for mere academic mistakes but for causing existential threats against their own countries; it is therefore a matter of high treason in their case.
WESTERN MISPERCEPTION OF ISLAM – SOCIOPOLITICAL DIMENSION

 

Part of the prevailing in the West misperception of the Muslim World has a lot to do with sociopolitical confusion. The use of maps plays here a certain role; people in the West know that there are different countries like Algeria, Egypt, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, etc.; and this is correct. People also know that the Saudi daily reality consists in an abominable barbarism, involving butchery, systematic rape, bestial mistreatment of the women (i.e. half of the population), extensive pedophilia that goes always unpunished, slavery, multifaceted discrimination, and unprecedented persecution, systematized disinformation, imposed ignorance, and overwhelming darkness.

 

But people in the West do not know that there are many other countries where most of the local population definitely share the same Saudi practice and (fake Islamic) belief, mindset, attitude and behavior, not at the political but at the social level.

This is the trouble: in many Muslim countries that appear to the rest of the world as having a political system (saying ‘more liberal’ would be sarcastic) more human than Saudi Arabia’s (example: Egypt, Algeria, Pakistan, Indonesia), there is an outright majority of the population (much above 3/4 of the country’s Muslims if we refer to Egypt, which means more than 70% of the country’s total population) that accept the daily life in Saudi Arabia as normal, correct, human, and Islamic; and consequently, they live accordingly in their own country by using all possible tricks of social oppression to which the supposedly more liberal state does not express any opposition. This means that all the aforementioned intolerable conditions of miserable life prevail among hundreds of millions of Muslims. This has nothing to do with politics (i.e. being pro-Muslim Brotherhood or pro-army in Egypt); the majority of those supporting the army regime in Egypt share absolutely the same way of backward thought, intolerable world view, and miserable lifestyle with the Saudis.

This leads to total misrepresentation of those countries at the international level, which is a form of direct cheating of the West. Before 5-6 years, as I lived in Egypt, I used to say that the fact that Mubarak’s wife did not wear the Islamic veil (hijab) was -in and by itself- a serious act of political deception addressed against the West.

 

Why was Suzanne Mubarak’s attitude a vicious cheating cycle against the West?

 

Because more than 3/4 of Muslims in Egypt would call any unveiled / uncovered woman a “prostitute”, which in turn automatically means that they believe that stoning must apply to her because of her ‘act’ not to wear a veil. So, instead of Suzanne Mubarak giving the West the false impression of an emancipated woman (which was – among Westerners – subconsciously extended from the person to the country’s overall female population), she should have taken initiatives to oppose and outmaneuver all those who imposed the wearing of hijab on all the Muslim women by means of social terrorism at the very cell of the society, namely the localities, the districts, the villages, the hamlets and the families.
(to be continued)

 

 

 

 

 

To be or not to be. Western Questions about ISIS and Islam reveal the Collapse of Christianity

By Prof. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis

Refutation of Prof. Mark Juergensmeyer’s article ‘Is ISIS Islamic?’

topkapi

This is the Caliphate that France, England and America did not want.

ISIS 1

And this is the ‘Caliphate’ that France, England and America wanted.

Sultan Murad and Safavid embassy

This is the Caliphate that France, England and America did not want.

ISIS 2

And this is the ‘Caliphate’ that France, England and America wanted.

Istanbul Topkapi

This is the Caliphate that France, England and America did not want.

ISIS 3

And this is the ‘Caliphate’ that France, England and America wanted.

In a previous article under title ‘Ottoman Empire, Fake ‘Middle East’, the Pseudo-Christians of the West, and the Forthcoming Tribulation’ (https://megalommatiscomments.wordpress.com/2014/10/11/ottoman-empire-fake-middle-east-the-pseudo-christians-of-the-west-and-the-forthcoming-tribulation/), I analyzed why the Western Christians’ stance towards their governments’ policies against the Ottoman Empire and its detached provinces (the technical entities of the so-called ‘Middle East’) is very wrong, definitely immoral, and in total contradiction with the Christian principles, values and virtues. I concluded that a great number of nominal Christians, who approved of the evil policies and deeds of the Western governments, are in reality pseudo-Christians irrespective of what they may think they are.

In a world engulfed in the worst crisis of identity of all times, it is only normal that doubts are raised as regards the identity of the ‘other.’ Only yesterday, Prof. Mark Juergensmeyer, who specializes in ‘global religion’ – a non-existent entity – questioned in an article the identity of ISIS (Is ISIS Islamic? / http://www.theglobalist.com/is-isis-islamic/).

Quite interestingly, under the title, a motto gives the summarizing idea of the article (“Every religion has its dark sides, but the conflict is about politics.”). This is absolutely irrelevant; dark sides in a religion are what you don’t know of that religion. They don’t exist by themselves. No religion has ever had any dark side whatsoever. And all conflicts about politics cannot be deprived of their own religious dimension, because everything in a human society hinges on the spiritual belief or disbelief. Atheists are religious too; they are slaves of Satan either they understand it or not. Their theory and their rejection of God is a form of Satanic faith.

When one starts with so many preconceived ideas as the global religion theoretician Prof. Mark Juergensmeyer, his approach is doomed to fail, but this does not originate from the lack of knowledge of the ‘other side’. And Prof. Mark Juergensmeyer’s main problem is not his lack of insightful knowledge about both, the Islamic world and ISIS itself. The article reveals a serious problem of Christian identity and for this reason I intended to comment on it. I think that my comments will be useful to both, Christians and Muslims.

The author of the article tries to implement the following simplistic logic: if we hold the Ku Klux Klan in the US and the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda as ‘Christian’, then we can consider ISIS as ‘Islamic’. This sort of approach does not clarify anything, and rather creates further confusion among both, Christians and Muslims. Generally speaking, I understand and accept the approach through analogy, but to implement this method in your text, you’ve got to select very firm examples. Yes, it is correct to say ‘if we hold the New and the Old Testament as holy books for the Christians, then we can consider the Quran as holy book for Muslims’. Beyond the limit of such comparisons, we can achieve minimal result through analogy and at times lose clarity.

There is always a very serious mistake in every approach that avoids a proper, direct definition and attempts to define something through its opposite. If you want to define Christianity, you cannot possibly be as vague as you are when saying ‘Christianity is something other than / different from Ku Klux Klan’ (or the LRA). Ditto for the Islamic World.

It is really gross to try to define Christianity as the antithesis of what the author calls the LRA ‘a terrible terrorist organization’! Who can expect a religion to possibly be ‘a terrible terrorist organization’? No one!

In addition, there are in Uganda hundreds of thousands if not millions of simple people who, if not terrorized, will have the courage to state that the LRA is NOT a terrorist organization – or if you want not as terrorist as the execrable, racist Ugandan government. And who is authorized to speak about ‘terrorism’? The global mass media? Or the defenders of a non-existent ‘global religion’?

But the term ‘terrorism’ (or ‘terrorist’) is an unhistorical fabrication that was composed only recently as a vicious tool of the world’s most evil, most villainous, and most dictatorial regimes, the likes of America, England and France. It has no credibility, and above all, it is used within political context. Why on Earth a scholar and an academic feels the need to confuse his readers so much as to mention a political term when he talks about religion?

Whatever Christianity has been or has not been or may have been, it is certainly something unrelated to modern political terms; even more so if these terms are recently invented as result of scheming and propaganda and therefore fully rejected by vast populations worldwide.

However, the use of brutal manners in order to achieve power that will later consolidate the survival and the propagation of a faith, a religion, a sect or a secret order-organization is widely attested in almost every religion, culture, nation and period.

There are many historical examples in this regard. The Ismailiyah Order of the Shia Muslims, who were also called Hashashin (because their leader, the famous ‘Elder of the Mountain’ administered the proper dose of hashish to his disciples in order to duly instrumentalize and effectively utilize them for his purposes) and were known to Marco Polo (he called them Assassins and this is how this word was first used in European languages), used to send members (their secret knights) to cross incredibly long distances to arrive where their target (a ruler, an military leader, an imam or other) lived and, by treacherously approaching, assassinate them. Should we call them ‘terrorists’? This would be utterly ridiculous.

It is actually always pathetic and ludicrous to project one period’s / civilization’s / culture’s measures, values and criteria onto other periods, civilizations and cultures. One cannot evaluate others through use of one’s own criteria; every civilization, culture, religion, and historical period is an independent entity that no scholar can transform as per his theoretical needs in any way. The reason for this maxim is simple; by slightly transforming (through improper evaluation involving external criteria) a civilization, culture, religion, and historical period, a scholar only modifies and misinterprets it. This scholar is therefore speaking of a false entity that practically speaking never existed (except in his misinterpretation and imagination); thus, he only confuses his unfortunate readers.

Another example is offered by the Christian Catholic Holy Inquisition. It is undisputed that this Holy Office carried out very brutal policies for long. Should we call it ‘terrorism’? This would also be utterly ludicrous.

As the author is continuously avoiding a proper definition for what is ‘Islamic’ and what is not, the article is characterized by a personal, individualistic approach that is both, irrelevant and confusing. Prof. Mark Juergensmeyer implements again the analogy approach, but this time at the very personal level. He, as a Christian, dissociates himself from the Ugandan LRA and the American Ku Klux Klan, and he therefore postulates that, accordingly, ‘this is the same position most Muslims are in now with regard to ISIS’.

This is very irrelevant because scholars are expected to include personal views and experience in their memoirs at the end of the their lives and not as supposedly convincing evidence in their articles and other publications. This style is very arrogant; in addition, it is very confusing because personal approaches do not constitute proper definitions. The sentence he makes is quiet evident: ‘As a Christian, I feel like they have nothing to do with me or with the Christianity that I know’. The last words reveal the extent of the problem; probably the globalist professor and specialist of the non existent ‘global’ religion ( !! ? !! )  does not know the Holy Inquisition, and consequently we can safely claim that he does not know Christianity well. And this is the problem for him and for all the misled and confused Christians of the West.

Many people have been driven to the impasse of assuming a lot; one of their wrong assumptions is to take today’s fallen Christianity as the true Christianity. Similarly, in the Islamic world, there are many Muslims, who assume that today’s fallen Islam is the true Islam. Both groups fail to understand one another because they primarily fail to understand themselves and accurately specify how far they have gone from their respective religions, sailing adrift in the Sea of Relativism and Faithlessness.

After the preliminary part of the article, its inconsistency turns it to a mere worthless piece. As the title obliges the author to give a definition of ISIS, the ‘global religion’ specialist or rather propagandist Mark Juergensmeyer enters into a series of mistakes while giving to his readers unexplained terms that are absolutely meaningless to the non-specialist.

He says: ‘What makes things even more complicated is that ISIS bases its beliefs and actions on a form of Islamic interpretation called Salafism’.

– Why on Earth is now the Salafist nature of ISIS (which is true and beyond any doubt) a problem?

Let me make my position clear. In many articles, I denounced the Wahhabism (the correct term for Salafism) as a deformation of Islam. But Wahhabism (or if you want Salafism) is nothing new to the Western world’s academia and diplomats.

To paraphrase Prof. Juergensmeyer, before any other institution on Earth, Saudi Arabiathe country that America catastrophically chose as its primary ally in the region before …. 70 years or, to put it otherwise, the country that England disastrously conspired with against the Ottoman Caliphate for more than 100 years before the fall of the Ottoman dynasty and continually ever since ‘bases its beliefs and actions on a form of Islamic interpretation called Salafism’.

What is Prof. Juergensmeyer talking about?

If Saudi Arabia did not exist, there would never be an ISIS.

What does Prof. Juergensmeyer want?

Does he want ISIS to disappear and Saudi Arabia to survive?

That’s silly.

Because if Saudi Arabia continues existing, even if ISIS is mercilessly exterminated and all its members and fighters executed ( and this needs at least 50000 US soldiers in a large scale land attack and in coordination with the venerable president of Syria! ), there will be another ISIS, an ISIS bis if you want, or an ISES (Islamic State of Egypt and Sudan), an ISYA (Islamic State of Yemen and Arabia), or any combination of letters you may choose!

As long as Saudi Arabia exists, Wahhabism will be its pseudo-Islamic state dogma, and through the filthy money of the inhuman gangsters who rule from Riyadh, Wahhabism will be diffused among the masses of Muslims from Morocco to Indonesia to the Muslim Diaspora worldwide.

What is even worse is that Prof. Juergensmeyer fails again to either give a definition of Wahhabism (Salafism) or the historical perspective thereof; as a matter of fact, all the filthy and un-Islamic, dark and inhuman ideas that Muhammad Abdel Wahhab (the founder of Wahhabism) shaped and propagated during the 18th c. did not fall from the sky into his idiotic and ignorant mind. There has been an entire historical process within Islam (with heretic theologians preceding Muhammad Abdel Wahhab by 450 and 900 years) that led to this monstrous theological deformation of Islam. All this is unknown to the ‘global religion’ professor who writes about Islam without having a clue of all academic fields pertaining to the study of this historical – spiritual phenomenon.

This is the historical reality, which is quite well known to specialists of Islamic History and Religion in the West, but it remains concealed, because it is politically disturbing and troublesome. If Wahhabism is not uprooted, if all the Wahhabi institutions across the world are not shut down, if a new class of Muslim intellectuals at the antipodes of Wahhabism is not formed, the explosive situation will only turn worse.

First point of conclusion is therefore that Saudi Arabia and the Saudi family itself must be denounced as the only matrix of all evil across the Islamic world for the last 200 years, and an overwhelming attack against it must be undertaken in order to totally eliminate Riyadh and the villainous, heretic elite which from there managed to incessantly spread the evilness of Wahhabism worldwide.

The confusing presentation of Prof. Juergensmeyer is due to the fact that he does not seek the historical, religious, cultural and theological truth, but only writes in order to serve political purposes and needs, preserve strategic alliances, and in the process, effectuate compromises. We saw these compromises in Mosul, in Sanjar and in Raqqah. These compromises are responsible for the evacuation of most of the Yazidis from their homelands; these compromises are the reason for the deracination of all the Aramaean Christians of Mosul; these compromises are the root cause of the hecatomb that the bloodthirsty vampires of ISIS want to deliver.

For one more time, the ‘global religion’ specialist, Prof. Juergensmeyer, attempts a confusing definition through analogy! He writes: “The Salafi movement is similar to an extreme fundamentalism in Christianity”. This is an understatement; in addition, who can specify what ‘fundamentalism in Christianity’ means? This is not called ‘definition’ but ‘anyone’s guess’…

It must however become crystal clear to Western readership that ISIS, Saudi Arabia, and Wahhabism, (Salafism) do not constitute any form of Islamic fundamentalism. They are heretic, so they cannot be held as Islamic in any sense. They are far and out of the foundations of Islam, so they cannot possibly be ‘fundamental’. Muhammad Abdel Wahhab in his days was considered as a heretic and a traitor by the Ottoman administration; the same evaluation concerned also the Ottoman Caliphate’s traitor and founder of the Satanic house of the Saudis.

The two earlier Islamic theologians on whom Abdel Wahhab was based to produce his pseudo-Islamic trash, namely Ahmed ibn Taimiyah and Ahmed ibn Hanbal who lived in the 13th-14th c. and the 8th-9th c, respectively, were also considered as heretic in their times and duly imprisoned. They may be unknown to Prof. Juergensmeyer, but he should then abstain from writing purposelessly on issues he is not relevant of.

The famous, 14th c. Moroccan traveler, explorer and scholar Ibn Battuta encountered in Damascus people who knew personally the evil, villainous and ignorant heretic Ibn Taimiyah who was then imprisoned. This is what the Islamic World’s most illustrious traveler wrote about the progenitor of Wahhabism:

A controversial theologian  

One of the principal Hanbalite doctors at Damascus was Taqi ad-Din Ibn Taymiya, a man of great ability and wide learning, but with some kink in his brain. The people of Damascus idolized him. He used to preach to them from the pulpit, and one day he made some statement that the other theologians disapproved; they carried the case to the sultan and in consequence Ibn Taymiya was imprisoned for some years. While he was in prison he wrote a commentary on the Koran, which he called ” The Ocean,” in about forty volumes. Later on his mother presented herself before the sultan and interceded for him, so he was set at liberty, until he did the same thing again. I was in Damascus at the time and attended the service which he was conducting one Friday, as he was addressing and admonishing the people from the pulpit. In the midst of his discourse he said “Verily God descends to the sky over our world [from Heaven] in the same bodily fashion that I make this descent,” and stepped down one step of the pulpit. A Malikite doctor present contradicted him and objected to his statement, but the common people rose up against this doctor and beat him with their hands and their shoes so severely that his turban fell off and disclosed a silken skull-cap on his head. Inveighing against him for wearing this, they haled him before the qadi of the Hanbalites, who ordered him to be imprisoned and afterwards had him beaten. The other doctors objected to this treatment and carried the matter before the principal amir, who wrote to the sultan about the matter and at the same time drew up a legal attestation against Ibn Taymiya for various heretical pronouncements. This deed was sent on to the sultan, who gave orders that Ibn Taymiya should be imprisoned in the citadel, and there he remained until his death.

At a certain point in his article, Prof. Juergensmeyer makes a totally misleading statement (“So, yes, ISIS is ultimately Islamic – whether you like it or not”), which can have disastrous consequences on anyone who may happen to accept it. A heretic cannot be identified with the religion from which he was rejected. It is not a mere point of accuracy, but a critical issue of false target.

Failing to understand this, he adds perjury to infamy, by completing his sentence with the following: “but it is certainly not the kind of Islam that most Muslims would accept or profess”.

This is a pure lie. And more than a merely false point, it reflects the tendencies of the Western governments to totally conceal the truth from their peoples. First of all, no one has accurate estimates on the subject. Gallup polls in several Muslim countries are prohibited – particularly on a subject this critical -, whereas in the rest no Gallup polls have ever been conducted on issues as troublesome as that.

However, there are many indicators that ISIS does truly reflect in a certain way the kind of false, heretic and decayed Islam that most Muslims accept and profess. If you make a list of what is correct as an act or practice of the Islamic way of both, personal life and social organization, including perhaps 500 detailed points accepted by the followers, the fighters and the leaders of ISIS, and then you submit this list to 1000 average Saudis (without adding that these points are all approved by ISIS members), their responses, homogeneous and ominous, will take you by surprise. Their agreement with the 500 points of the list will deliver a result far above 90-95%.  Similar results, always above 80%, you will collect from countries like Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Yemen, Sudan, Egypt, Algeria, etc. And certainly the agreement will be lower in other countries, but even in Turkey, it will be as high as 40% due to the vicious Western policies in favor of the AKP party Islamists and against the nationalist military establishment of Ankara (a paranoid policy that allowed the ruling Islamists to widen their basis through a varied set of methods).

How can one be sure of this?

By simply walking in the streets of districts inhabited by middle and lower classes (that total more than 80-90% of the total population of the country in most of the aforementioned cases) and observing what goes around, talking to the people, asking about their ideas, and entertaining comprehensive discussions as to just how they see and how they want to see their lives and their social environment – something that Prof. Juergensmeyer did not do, ultimately preferring the calmness and the security of his office somewhere in the States.

However, the situation is far worse than that. If you now present the same list (of what is correct as an act or practice of the Islamic way of personal life and social organization, including perhaps 500 detailed points accepted by the followers, the fighters and the leaders of ISIS) to a selected group of academics, engineers, businessmen, administrators and high profile functionaries, deputies of ‘parliament’ (this is a non-representative assembly for most of the cases), military, ministers and religious authorities across the Islamic world (without however saying that these points are all approved by ISIS members), you will collect even more surprising results. The outright majority of the elite of these countries (and I don’t mean here only Saudi Arabia but all the aforementioned countries) in majority supports the same points. This is for instance the reason one should view the latest president El Sisi of Egypt as theologically – ideologically – politically far closer to the former president Morsy than to the one time vice president El Baradei.

It would take too long to narrate how this situation has been formed, but I would however like to briefly hint at what I said earlier about the theologians who served as source of inspiration for Muhammad Abdel Wahhab, the founder of the Wahhabism (Salafism), namely the heretics Ibn Taimiyah and Ibn Hanbal. In fact, if Muhammad Abdel Wahhab developed the theological system that constitutes today’s Wahhabists’ doctrine, this is due to the fact that Ibn Hanbal’s and Ibn Taimiyah’s successive and intertwined theological systems gradually prevailed among the Islamic world and eliminated or transformed/altered all the opposite systems.

As a matter of fact, if one Muslim imam, qadi, mufti, minister, general, professor, president or businessman today rejects Wahhabism, he still accepts Ibn Taimiyah’s widespread and fully accepted theological system, which is – metaphorically speaking – the tree that produced the fruit of Wahhabism. There is, practically speaking, little difference or no difference at all between the two systems; simply every posterior system that emanates from an anterior is expected to feature and does actually feature some extra points.

The real difference existed in the past, in Islam’s Golden Era, when totally opposite philosophical systems totally prevailed across the highly educated Islamic World. These are the philosophical systems of Ibn Sina, Qurtubi, Ibn Rushd, Ghazali, Mohyieldin Ibn Arabi, Ibn Hazm, to name but a few; to them is due the Islamic Enlightenment, whereas to the gross, villain, uneducated trash of Ibn Taimiyah is due the complete disfigurement of Islam’s quintessence. However, due to the gradual diffusion of Ibn Taimiyah’s theological nonsense and ignominious darkness, and following its prevalence among ignorant and uneducated masses that it created in a vicious circle mechanism, as it attacked Science, Knowledge, Philosophy, Art and Spirituality, gradually all the philosophical systems of the aforementioned Titans of the Islamic Thought disappeared until the end of the 16th c.

Of course, there is one more difference between the political elites of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, etc. and the ISIS extremists; the former, although accepting most of Abdel Wahhab’s theories and all of Ibn Tamiyah’s ideas, differ politically and make the necessary compromises to ensure the survival of their regime. Contrarily, the latter reject the compromise of the former, viewing it as a treason of Islam. Political difference is therefore due to mere survival tactics of elites that are theological quasi-identical to ISIS; these elites believe that by making compromises upon compromises with the West, they can prolong their tenure and the ensuing material benefits. But their existence only spearheads new waves of uncompromising Wahhabists. Certainly, there is also an attitudinal difference (but no behavioral difference) between the followers of a guy like al Bashir of Sudan or Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen and the fighters of ISIS; the former want to pocket more money and store it in their banks, whereas the latter are ready to die. But none of them would accept his wife to be uncovered (without hejab, the Islamic veil) or his daughter to travel alone on motorbike across Europe.

The best corroboration of the aforementioned is the following tragicomical contrast between Egypt’s last and current presidents; Muhammad Morsy is viewed by some as extremist  whereas the incumbent is considered as a moderate and pragmatist person.

Former Egyptian president Muhammad Morsy’s wife wears hejab (Islamic veil that allows the face to be seen).

Current Egyptian president El Sisi’s wife used to wear a niqab (Islamic veil that covers the face entirely leaving only two small holes for the eyes) and only recently “swapped the niqab for a trendy hijab, hushing up claims that she was dyed-in-the-wool” (http://www.albawaba.com/slideshow/sisi-wife-intisar-amer-581626)!!

Prof. Juergensmeyer goes on saying that the reason for which “world leaders are trying to make in saying that ISIS is ‘not Islamic’.” is that ISIS “is certainly not the kind of Islam that most Muslims would accept or profess”. In the light of the aforementioned this appears to be a very unfortunate consideration and an erroneous evaluation of what is going on in the Islamic world.

Reaching the end of the brief yet mistaken article, Prof. Juergensmeyer says that Islam’s name means “peace” which is very wrong (in reality, it means ‘submission to God’ although it originates from the word ‘peace’).

In the article’s last three paragraphs, Prof. Juergensmeyer makes one more futile effort to dissociate ISIS from today’s prevalent Islamic theological systems and to associate it with politics. This is quite pointless and misplaced. In fact, there is no, and there cannot be any, difference between religion and politics in Islam. So, everything that is religious is also political, and vice versa.

Contrarily to the wrong Western assumption that Islam is the only system whereby religion and politics constitute an indivisible entity of faith and action, it is historically proven that all the major religions were systems in which faith and government were perfectly well interwoven. The same occurred particularly in Christianity either Orthodox or Catholic; one may even ponder that in some cases the phenomenon occurred more emphatically in Christianity than in Islam; extensively discussed terms, such as Papocaesarism and Caesaropapism are quite telling in this regard.

So, Prof. Juergensmeyer’s sentence “Besides religion, it is critical to recognize that all the forms of terrorism that we have seen are about politics. Any act of violence in the public sphere is aimed at trying to claim political space – at taking over power to assume control over regions or peoples. This is certainly true in the case of ISIS” is absolutely irrelevant and completely wrong.

The way one family lives is defined by religion; the way one society is organized is specified by religion; the way the art of rule is exercised is decreed by religion. The aforementioned does not only apply to the Islamic world; it does also to Ancient Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Iran, etc. It is also valid in Confucian China, Biblical Israel, and Christian Rome or Constantinople. One can enter into details that can fill volumes: the way one fights in battle is determined by religious orders; the way one sleeps is elucidated by religious advice; the way one eats is clarified by religious guidance; the way one has sex is stipulated by religious prescriptions, and so on.

Piety is one of the religious traits and virtues that must be reflected in a person’s life, either this person is Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu or Confucian. I fully agree with Prof. Juergensmeyer that “most people directly involved in ISIS are not pious Muslims”; this is right. But does it really matter?

And what about Prof. Juergensmeyer? Will he agree with me saying that “most people directly involved in Assets Management are not pious Christians”?

When we see vulture-funds in Latin America terrorizing nations like Argentina (which involves populations far larger than Iraq or Syria) and endangering the lives and the well-being of dozens of millions of people, do we still need to focus exclusively on a minor terrorist group and forget worse gangsters and terrorists who are far more perilous than the idiotic fighters of ISIS?

And this concludes the case of this type of confusing presentations and futile approaches that leave the Western readership in mysteries; identifying the true reasons of an explosive situation may help greatly solve and diffuse the crisis. But it entails a real inquiry about the original and the altered, the genuine and the transfigured, the authentic and the corrupt. Instead of searching pretexts and excuses, one should seek the truth.

It is not only greatly comical but also highly perilous for the Western leaders to continue on the same track. Why should they bother whether most of today’s Muslims accept or don’t accept the doctrine and the practices of ISIS? The Western leaders themselves constantly disregard the majority of the population back in their countries, and particularly when the majority is ostensibly opposite to calamitous choices that they make (such as the case of the erroneously conceived and catastrophically carried out attack against, and occupation of, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq). Their disregard for the wishes and the opinions of the majority of their countries’ populations is monumental; they cannot be sensitive for other nations when they are insensitive for their own.

The search for the reasons that brought about the present situation cannot be undertaken by Western academia, intellectuals and diplomats without a deep investigation of the developments that took place in their own countries in the first place. Before bothering to know whether ISIS is Islamic or not, they should care to find out whether the so-called Christian nations of the West are really Christian. Drunken of their colonial successes for many centuries, the Western peoples lived with myths and lies that totally disfigured the true dimensions of their own deeds, choices and policies. Modernity is not Christian but Anti-Christian. Globalism is not Divine but Satanic. And the Homosexual Marriages are not the ‘right of the free’ but the evilness of the slaves – of Satan.

Atheist, materialistic, and despiritualized, the Western world turned out to be the Cemetery of the Christian Faith. That’s why the leaders of the Western countries did not give a damn about the persecution, expulsion and extermination of the Aramaean Christians in Mosul. They face now a nominalist and legalist theological system of despiritualized Muslims, who are partly westernized and deeply materialistic, which means filled with extremely contradictory elements able to explode with uncontainable consequences.

The fallacy, inhumanity and monstrosity of either systems is such that one could simply consider them as the two faces of same coin. So corrupt and eroded this coin is that nothing can save it; it will soon be thrown in the Hell that it deserves. And its two faces, in full discord to one another, are triggering now by themselves the downgrading spiral that will bring their end. To survive one has to dissociate him/herself from the onerous coin as much as possible, as soon as possible, and as irreversibly as possible.

 

 

 

 

The Ottoman Caliphate, the fake Caliphate ISIS, and Raja Casablanca Soccer Team Fans

Many in the West are taken by surprise when similar events take place. But they should not.

On September 29, 2014, numerous fans of the Moroccan soccer team Raja Casablanca were caught chanting in favor of Da’esh (also known as ISIS or ISIL), the fake Caliphate, and calling others for Jihad.

This reflects a multilevel reality that was unreported in the West, as governments and mass media have long done their ingenious best to conceal what really happened across Dar al Islam, the Islamic World, and leave their audience in mysteries.

The trouble is that they don’t reveal this reality now for good! They want only to use it for reasons of belligerency and clash. This will generate further problems to all nations, groups, countries and governments involved because when a reality is presented to audiences as an unexpected development (whereas it was expected and anticipated by many), this very reality is automatically deformed and subsequently misperceived.

What is the multilevel reality that was concealed from the average Westerner?

To avoid compiling volumes, I will have to be quite schematic. I will therefore enumerate herewith major issues that should have become known to the average Westerner over the past 200 years.

1. Internal reasons and developments led the Islamic World to decay at the end of the 16th c. Islamic Science, Philosophy, Art, Knowledge and Spirituality became the target of ignorant and uneducated, barbaric and heretic theologians, and in three successive layers (9th c Ahmed ibn Hanbal / 13th-14th c Ahmed ibn Taimiyah / 18th c Muhammad Abdel Wahhab), the expended heretic theological system was diffused widely, prevailing among Sunni and Shia, and corrupting the minds, the attitudes and the behaviors every time more and worse. To these three theologians is due the entire collapse of the Islamic Civilization, the progressive disintegration of the Islamic societies, and the full incapacitation of the Islamic states.

2. The Western explorers, researchers, scientists, linguists and historians, e.g. the Orientalists, who encountered the above mentioned situation first in the late 18th and the early 19th c., and the businessmen, military, diplomats and agents, who first dealt with it, did not draw the correct conclusions as regards what the Western countries should do about this troublesome issue.

3. As the main target of the English and the French was colonial of nature, the truly problematic situation in which they found all these lands rather suited well their interests, as it was heralding the forthcoming demise of the world’s three largest Islamic empires, namely the Ottoman Empire, Safavid / Qadjar Iran, and Mughal India.

4. The English, entering into contact with the Wahabbis, deliberately used the barbaric and inhuman heresy as a tool to bring the Islamic Caliphate down. This was an immoral act of enormous dimensions. This is the main reason of most of today’s troubles between the Islamic World and the West; however, it is not the only.

5. The French and the English were the first colonial powers that controlled parts of the aforementioned three Islamic empires. Acting on the aforementioned background, they triggered a vicious divide within the Islamic societies – something that was not reflected at the level of colonial and post-colonial administrations. What we see now is the mere consequence of this divide.

6. In fact, the Islamic society either in Egypt, Algeria, Aden, Morocco, India or elsewhere rejected in its overwhelming majority the local stooges of the colonial administrations – all the sheikhs, the imams, the administrators, the businessmen, the military, the academics, and the journalists who accepted to collaborate with the colonials, change their attitudes, behaviors and mentalities, and pretend that Islam was not in opposition with the West, and that the Islamic societies could cope with westernization.

7. The collapse of the Caliphate generated a terrible shock within the Islamic societies and a defensive attitude was shared by the largest part of the Islamic societies; this attitude made of the Islamic religion (not the true one, but the form of the fallen Islam that was formed following the diffusion of the aforementioned three theological systems) the last subterfuge of all the Muslims, particularly those who had lost their rightful state, i.e. the Ottoman Empire. This only increased the importance of the religious authorities in the eyes of the people; having been left without a state, all they had to preserve was their religion. Of course, they could not imagine that their religion was not the true Islam as it believed and practiced before 12-13-14 centuries but a decayed form of nominal, de-spiritualized religion.

8. When the colonial presence was replaced with post-colonial interference, Western ideological schemes, like nationalism and socialism, attracted parts of the society, and an artificial enthusiasm was created, but the phenomenon was alien to the Islamic societies and could not therefore last long. It was quite ephemeral indeed.

9. Westernization was not discredited in itself among the Islamic societies. It was above all stigmatized by the immorality and the perversity of the small segment of the local society that accepted it. Even worse, Westernization was invalidated by the ridiculous, shameless, and disrespectful rulers who were installed in the fake post-colonial states. They were viewed as disgraceful, local stooges and as the unworthiest trash in the world. Closer was the cooperation of a president, king, emir, etc. with the West, more despised he was. The rejection was extended to his family, social class, clan, and followers.

10. For many long decades, the West supported therefore what was for the outright majority of the Muslims the unworthiest element of their society. This created an explosive situation, particularly because it was laced with shamefully anti-Islamic policies that automatically made of those rulers the patented kufar (plural of kafir, i.e. unbeliever) for rejection.

11. The fact that most of today’s Muslims, their religious authorities, and their educational / academic elite have partly accepted the Western world (technology, academic doctrines and disciplines, lifestyle, etc.) only worsens the problem because it brings more contradictory elements into an explosive situation.

12. The reality that most of today’s Muslims are very far from real Islam, ignore almost everything of the Islamic Civilization, and are truly lost within the swamp of decadent Islam does not represent a positive but a negative element. Certainly a true Muslim (by the standards of Islam’s Golden Era) would have fully rejected the fake Caliphate of Raqqa and Mosul in Syria – Iraq; but he would have also rejected today’s Western world – pretty much like all the Fathers of the Christian Church would have refuted it.

13. On the other hand, the official tenants of today’s Islamic religious authorities, who all reject the fake Caliphate, offer only a lip service to today’s Muslims. No one trusts themm as they are viewed as ‘the puppets of the puppets’, i.e. the worthless servants of the ignorant, uneducated, and uncultured Mubaraks who rule and defame their own countries.

14. In fact, it is quite interesting that all those silly and fake Islamic religious authorities in Madinah, Mecca, Cairo, Tunis, Karachi, Rabat, etc. did not bother to duly expand on a key subject, namely ‘why’ they accuse the fake Caliphate for being false and fake. If they fail to produce even one analytical text on this subject, it is easy for a knowledgeable person to understand the reason. They would reject the fake Caliphate only for mere political reasons – simply because it does not suit the interests of their ignominious and parasitic masters who are not Muslims either, but occupy leadership positions only to allow the West fully implement the Freemasonic – Zionist plan of total extinction of Islam.

15. Caught between false rulers and fake Islamists, the uneducated masses of Morocco, Egypt, Indonesia, Bangladesh, etc. easily opt for those who look more intransigent, e.g. the diabolical authorities of the fake Caliphate; to the eyes of the people they seem to have at least some integrity, dignity and commitment. Not because they have any, but because the long ruling pro-Western puppets proved to have none.

Had the average Muslim been properly educated as per the prescriptions of the Islamic Education of the Golden Era, the average Muslim would not have been so superficial to be attracted by the ignorant Islamists of the fake Caliphate.

But the villainous Freemasonic gangsters, who fully control the evil governments of France, Holland, Belgium, Canada, Australia, England and America, took a particular joy in deliberately blocking for more than two centuries the way of all the Muslims toward the Islamic Knowledge of the Golden Era of Islam. It is therefore high time now for the evil colonial powers and their disreputable local puppets to pay for their deeds. And they will pay very dearly.

 

Fans Of Morocco’s Raja Casablanca Soccer Team Chant: ‘ISIS! ISIS! Let’s Go On Jihad’
Raja Casablanca is one of Morocco’s most popular soccer clubs. It was established in 1949 and has won 11 league titles, seven national cups, and three CAF (Confederation of African Football) Champions League titles. It was also the first Arab team to participate in the FIFA Club World Cup in Brazil in 2000. One week after Algerian militants kidnapped and slaughtered a French tourist, a video surfaced on the Internet in which Moroccan soccer fans chant pro-ISIS slogans. In the video, posted on September 29, 2014, the fans can be heard chanting: “ISIS! ISIS!” and “Let’s go on Jihad!”Following is an excerpt:

Click here to view this clip on MEMRI TV

Capture930.JPG

Soccer fans: “ISIS! ISIS!

“ISIS! ISIS!

“ISIS! ISIS!

“ISIS! ISIS!

Capture9301.JPG

“Allah Akbar! Let’s go on Jihad!”

View The Clip