On Islam pt III...

"Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby." -Sura 2, The Cow, verse 78.

"Search not the book called the Scripture, which any human hand might make, but the Scripture called the Creation." -Thomas Payne, The Age of Reason

My enquiries into the Quran though undoubtedly amateurish have thus far yielded a number of questions, the answers to these will perhaps shed some light on the book's origin, aswell as explain it's efficacy as founding document of what would go on to become a globalized, Imperialist ideological system.

1/ Was Muhammad really it's creator, if so how and when did he become so well acquainted with the Hebrew and Christian canons?

2/ If so, was the book merely Muhammad's means of satisfying a very terrestrial desire, namely: founding a State, in the manner of renowned figures such as Cyrus the Great; Moses; Jesus; St Paul or even Romulus, which would in his reckoning rival that of the Sassanid Empire; Byzantine Christians; Jewish culture; the merchant Quraysh tribe; or “extravagant”, financially powerful elements who had turned the practice of religion around Mecca into a business?

3/ If as is asserted in Ibn Ishaq's “The Life of Muhammad”[1], the prophet was merely the intercessor of 'God's word'; it having been revealed to him over a period of 20 years in Mecca and Medina, after being 'contacted' in the caves of Hira at the age of forty and on various following occasions by the arch-angel Djibril (Gabriel), then who (assuming he was not actually a supernatural being) was this 'shining' emissary of the heavens; what were his intentions; and from where did he derive the authority for the bestowal of such comprehensive and absolutist demands???

4/ Was this 'angelic' interlocutor' merely a plot device employed by the originator of the Quranic mythology, in order to impart it with greater significance and eminence than it may have had, perhaps being conceived after Muhammad's unsuccessful attempts at preaching a reproduced, monotheistic doctrine to the polytheistic Quraysh.

5/ If we consider Gabriel to have been the source of the Quran, himself neither an entirely fictitious, or supernatural being, then might he have been the emissary of: {a}a besieged or formerly defeated; assimilated; or disbanded Imperial power, 'seeming to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound being healed', seeking to re-consolidate and re-establish itself; {b} an established and declining power or faction seeking to conserve it's vulnerable body in a new shell; or {c}an established Imperial power making long term political calculations?

6/ If {a},{b} or {c} then what are the potential candidates for such a force, in close proximity to the Persian, Byzantine, Egyptian Empires or other established cultures and tribes in and around the Black Sea region at the time?

I believe the pursuit of these questions aside from being an intriguing and fulfilling study on their own, will yield new insights as to the roots and origins of not only Islam, but the other Abrahamic religious systems and their mythological underpinnings.

This pursuit, whether completely fruitful or not may also demonstrate a common thread inherent to the imposition of all Totalitarian and hierarchical systems known to us throughout History, from Babylon and it's ancient dynasties to modern manifestations of hierarchical rule by force, subjugation and mystification.

However let us leave these fascinating distractions for now, and proceed with the less enjoyable task of reading and critically analysing the religion of Islam's foundational document: the 'Holy' Quran and it’s contents.

Being more or less utterly faithless and certainly more than less suspicious, as I read I am allowing an impression of each chapter to develop in my mind in regards to it's application for the education of impressionable, or otherwise ignorant minds, I am considering how the poorly educated, illiterate and ill-informed would be susceptible to seduction by it's promises of rewards and punishments.

My interest is not in judging it's often alleged 'wisdom', though I will note the appearance of such if and when I find it, -if only because of the novelty such content would provide-, nor will I seek to judge the veracity or continuity of the narrative as an accurate historical account, being as the book is not organized in chronological order and rearranging it thus would be a longer and more arduous task than I feel is necessary or worth my time, though I will be taking the Historical period into account along with various events and material situations as they relate to the subject matter. I will draw from Ibn Ishaq's “Life of Muhammad” to offer a greater insight where I feel necessary, as well as various other books on ancient civilizations of the East and Mythology.

I will merely be reading the work and recording my thoughts on each small segment if and when they appear, as I would any work of fiction or collection of essays, this will mean that what is included in my analysis is confined to what I find: illogical; surprising; familiar; subtly -or less so- manipulative; misinformed; mystificatory; which might incite abandonment of thought, logic or some other action distasteful to me as a citizen of secular society in the 21^st century.

This is not to say my intention is to deride the Holy book of Islam, though fearing neither the supernatural being to whom it is supposedly dedicated, nor worldly powers which derive all authority they profess from it, I am certainly willing to do so when It seems warranted, I am not ISIL or Boko Haram, there will be no kidnapping or forcible conversion to enlightenment philosophy or atheism, there will be no threat of crucifixion if the reader refuses to cease being psychologically oppressed by phantoms.

I am genuinely interested in learning more about this ideological system, the manifestations of which confront us on a daily basis more often than not in less than admirable forms, and have been since September 11th 2001.

In working directly from the book I am attempting to satisfy my curiosity as to whether the work in question is conducive to producing such expressions of 'faith'; whether it actually conveys an ambiguous message that may often be misrepresented or misunderstood; or even whether the content -as is often alleged by Western liberals, religionists, and 'moderate' Muslims- encourages people toward kindness, charity, humility and moral rectitude, for the good individual Muslims as well as the wider community of which they are parts.

I have noticed much of it is written so as to inform a clerical class, with a small percentage of each chapter containing direct instruction or orders regarding what to say, one imagines when publically addressing the masses whom it was intended to proselytise.

I have mentioned in an earlier segment the fact that at the period of 'revelation', the overwhelming majority of people were neither Muslim -they were disposed to the “worship of idols”-, nor were they what one might recognize as intellectual types, those who could read well enough to discern their interest in adopting the 'new' message either did so or did not, one assumes in relation to their fear of punishments frequently reiterated, or their perceived rewards for self interested conformity.

The book is filled with advice on what to do to those who wouldn't and what they would receive, this in itself accentuates an inherent contradiction within any religion between the zealous and believing lay people who generally exhibit far more faith than knowledge, and a refined, well educated clerical caste who exhibit more knowledge of the faith they profess, this is a fact which anyone with 'eyes to see' may observe in any society where the practice of religion is prevalent or encouraged, one may even suggest the clerical classes in any religion believe the messages they preach, less than they believe the masses beneath them need it to regiment and regulate their behaviour.

Far from attempting to institute a reflection of this 'master/bondsman' relationship, my endeavour is intended to attract criticism, contradiction and correction which I will always encourage and attempt to accept graciously, I also hope that knowledge may be gained from this undertaking, even if that is only of another perspective on the Quran and the religion of which it forms the basis.

In part II, I noticed how numerous parts of the Hebrew canon had been appropriated by the author, in particular the story of Joseph reproduced in Chapter 12 titled Yusuf, which is the diluted portrayal of the story found in the book of Genesis, though here greatly reduced in content to merely that required to affirm the power of a divine, supernatural being by whom the ancient Israelites are alleged to have been held in thrall and directed.

I actually went back to the original story as well as the books of Jeremiah, Ezekial and Daniel which are based in the same region and bare more than a slight correlation to many of the theological and methodological aspects of this narrative.

If indeed this concept of “The Lord” common to both books does refer to a worldly power rather than supernatural being, as surely all but the most zealous adherents would agree,  it is in all likelihood the very same force, or at least similarly intentioned, and may well have manifestations in the modern world, which trace their lineage all the way to the “God” of Abraham from which they derive their authority, there are certainly some, if certain authors on the Royal families of Europe are to be believed, which claim that to be so, treating the world as their personal dominion and it's people as their servants in a manner reminiscent of the “God” of Eden.

A hierarchical power which many Jews at the time of Muhammad had come to view with a substantial degree of suspicion, and who even at the time of Moses, Jeremiah or Ezekial were very far from being in conformity with 'His' 'divine' will, as the frequent pejorative description of them as rebellious or consistent rebukes for setting up equals to 'Him' in the old Testament show, 'For the Lord their God was a jealous God', perhaps the various Archons, Satraps, Lords and Vassals in the administrative regions of various Empires grew in wealth and influence to the degree that they may have challenged certain 'seats' of power? Indeed “The Discourses of Macchiaveli” are filled with such cases, though many are more recent may we not still surmise it was ever thus?

Chapter 14 'Ibrahim' continues in much the same vein as many of the foregoing and following chapters, “revealing” stories already recounted nearly a millenium prior to the Quran, although unlike 'Yusuf', this is not a reproduction of the story of Abraham as it's known, it makes use of not only him but also Moses and similar stories from Arabic mythology, in order once again to impress upon the audience a great deal of respect for the 'emissary of Allah' charged with conveying “God's word”.

Apparently this is a book 'revealed' so as to “bring mankind out of every kind of darkness into light, by the command of their Lord, to the path of the Mighty the Praiseworthy”[2], I am willing to accept that the Arabic here may not refer to 'Mankind' in the way we would recognize it today, perhaps the connotations in Arabic are closer to 'the people' or 'the populace', but let us stick with “Mankind” as alluding to the species in general, as it's how my translation renders the term at various points.

What does Allah, the “Creator of the Heavens and the Earth” have against the American Continent, the inhabitants of the South Pacific, East Asia, most of the African continent or the Australian Aboriginals, that his divine majesty would see fit to exclude them from the general “Mankind”?

I mean they would have had no means whatsoever of being “brought out of the darkness” by this book, indeed they would have absolutely no way of knowing about it until numerous centuries after it's 'revelation', even then they would only have learnt about it as the subjects of invasion by Moorish or Christian explorers and obviously not in their own language, no similar mythology having yet been found in the Native American, ancient Chinese, African or Aboriginal tongues, I think we can be fairly certain that the “mankind” here referred to, are only those able to understand spoken Arabic, at that period not a great number and if we're talking about the written word far fewer, even in Asia Minor.

What are we to surmise from this, that Allah is an ignoramus, a cultural chauvinist who considers only Arabic speakers to be part of Mankind?

Or (my personal opinion) 'He' is merely a human construct, therefore subject to the inadequacies of 'His', perhaps justifiably at the period of the 7^th Century; short-sighted, fallible Human creators?

The next verse [3] goes on to state that actually, “Allah [is he] to Whom belongs whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the Earth”, thereby showing that maybe the entire Human race does belong to him, but only those fluent in Arabic are considered part of “mankind” and will be removed from darkness.

I admire this tactic, if 'He' has no idea how big the Earth actually is, how many regions of it are populated by non-Semitic language speakers, human cultures and societies that 'He' had never heard of[4], then laying claim to the entirety of the Earth at the time largely veiled to this 'great revealer', at least means he wouldn't eventually be disappointed.

I'd rather believe Allah was being purposely vague knowing the Earth is expanding a certain amount every year, rather than being a chauvinistic Eurasian-centrist who viewed the majesty of the Grand Canyon, mysteries of the Amazon rainforest, diversity of the great plains of Africa, snow covered continents of the Polar regions and unique, isolated beauty of Australia as utterly worthless compared to the earthquake, drought, famine and war ravaged sands of Muhammad's back yard.

[5]

But here a serious question arises for me, if all belongs to 'Him', if 'He' is genuinely “All Seeing, All Knowing”, the purveyor of instruction to benefit the Muslim people through Muhammad, then why oh why didn't 'He' mention anything about the black gold under their very feet, or instruct Muhammad on how to extract and utilize oil at any point in the Quran?

Surely asserting Allah's ownership of the entirety of creation would have been easier, had it  contained instruction on building ships capable of crossing the Atlantic?[6]

All progress in this direction came centuries later for Islamic civilization, all within the World already owned by private industrialists, Empires and Nation States, but previously claimed by Allah.

Once the Ideological heartland and totalitarian State had been constructed in Mecca, the core doctrine elaborated and fetishized, it was no problem to become a syncretic, somewhat outward looking expansionist system.[7] Islamic empires assimilating not only elements of Greek mathematics and philosophy, but translating a large amount of ancient literature which may have been lost, and even reaching as far afield as China a long established civilization to whom Allah had suspiciously never seen fit to bestow the original 'revelation'.

Verse 6 repeats verse 2 from the perspective of Moses, the semi-mythological Moses being used as an example of 'The Lord's' power to stand against Pharoah, thus 'remove from darkness' those who vowed servilit,y and by pain of eternal punishment pledged unremitting fealty.

It seems clear that there is a recurring them at work here, verse 10 has other examples of a people warned by this archetype of the divine messenger; the cases of Noah, Ad and Thamud, "The Prophets", a frequently deployed tactic by the author to substantiate his part in a lineage of 'divinely inspired' fear mongers: “Their messengers came with clear signs, but they [the people being warned] turned their hands to their mouths saying 'we disbelieve in that which you have been sent.'”.

The message here is simple: disbelieve in me and my message then the fate of the people of Noah, Ad, Thamud, earlier we had Lot aswell; as it is reiterated ad-nauseum throughout the book, will surely befall you

Verse 12: “it is not for us to bring proof except by the command of Allah”.

When asked to provide proof or when they're asked 'why?' Messengers bringing threats in order to coerce and subjugate a people to follow their 'religious' rules, offer no explanation and instead go off on a rant about hellfire and damnation.
This appears to me as an effective means of testing the submissiveness, ignorance and credulity of a population; upon those with some small measure of pride who resist; "The Unbelievers", are heaped egregious punishments.

The chapter goes on to tell us, in verse 13: “...In Allah let those who trust put their trust”, and 14: “Those who disbelieved said to their messengers: 'We will expel you from the land unless you return to our religion.' Then the Lord sent unto them [their messengers] the revelation: 'We will, surely, destroy the wrongdoers'”; 15: “'And We will, surely, make you dwell in the land after them. This is for him who fears to stand before My Tribunal and fears My warning'”; 16: “And they prayed for victory, and as a result thereof every haughty enemy of truth came to naught.”; 17: “Before him is Hell; and he shall be made to drink boiling water.”; 18: “He shall sip it and shall not be able to swallow it easily. And death shall come to him from every quarter, yet he shall not die. And besides that there shall be for him a severe chastisement.”

This is clearly the application of primitive statecraft to people's very souls; envoys or messengers sent to obtain territory by words, then if they are denied that territory, to take it by force, the people attacked and ruined become easy prey to the threats and seductions of Religion.

Bear in mind this is the supreme 'God' of the Islamic religion as described in their own 'Holy' book, these punishments, though undoubtedly grotesque imply by their crude simplicity a very unimaginative human origin, far more distressing and vomit inducing sadism has been produced in Cinema during the last decade, whoever wrote the ancient tome really wasn't trying all that hard.

When there is talk of the 'creation' of the Earth or 'Heavens' we are merely hearing of the formulation and establishment of Empires, cities, principalities and primitive economic systems, as verse 21 states: “that is not at all hard for Allah”, the story is merely primitive diplomacy, statecraft by barbarism dressed in pseudo mystical garb.

As with the Vedic texts, Christian Bible or Hebrew Torah of which I am likewise merely an interested student, I do not believe the production of the Quran to have been dependent in any way upon the existence of a supernatural power, to which human beings are encouraged to prostrate themselves before, in unthinking submission.

In all the frequently deployed imperatives within these works to do just that , one can easily discern the grasping hands of irredeemably flawed and imperfect human beings, seeking to exploit the credulity, ignorance and superstition common to man in a bygone age, thus establishing a dominion and legacy that may outlast the personal finitude before which we are all powerless.
To paraphrase Laplace's retort to the Emperor Napolean when he asked where was god in the former's model of the Solar System; these constructs “work perfectly well without that assumption”.

______

[1] To my knowledge the only reliable and near contemporaneous attempt at a history of his life

[2] 14.2

[3] 14.3

[4] Neglecting as 'He' had to contact them in a similar manner to how, 'He' contacted successive Desert and Cave dwelling tribes on the periphery of the ancient Babylonian and Egyptian Empires, a region ravaged by perpetual tectonic shifts and volcanic eruptions.

[5] As we can see from this map derived from the scholarship of Ptolemaic Egypt and dated around the 12^th century ad, which was produced in Europe by the Arab 'al Idrisi' who was working for the Norman Monarchy, even more than four centuries since the arrival of “God's Messenger”, Islamic civilization had failed to accurately define the “entirety of the Earth”, to which whatsoever was contained therein apparently belonged to Allah.

[6] Even instructions on the domestication of Horses or some maps would have helped achieve this aim but do we find any such thing contained within the Prophet's revelation, absolutely not, merely grandiose repeated claims that Allah has created 'everything', that all within it belongs to 'Him', recurring threats of eternal damnation, promises of water featured gardens with no instruction as to their maintenance or construction and repeated commandments to be honest, upright in one's dealings; because “Allah sees all, knows all”, it's almost as though this book was spawned from the mind of a merchant without any understanding of these things, though a rudimentary understanding of persuasion and seduction, or even more likely a useless cleric, with knowledge only pertaining to dusty fragments of parchment upon which were written bits and pieces of the Judeo-Christian canon, and the ability to make them appear relevant to people's harsh lives in a barren land.






[7] The History and development of Islam as a World Power, it's various factions, attempts at unification, schisms and Empires it has spawned, are huge subjects in themselves which I can only briefly allude to in a generalized form here. Some were more outward looking than others, depending on the culture upon which the Islamic hierarchy was established to govern.