10
« on: August 13, 2007, 07:22:02 AM »
From what I understand, there is a big jump in al-Najm between verses 18 and 19
18 Certainly saw from signs of his Lord, the greatest one!
19 Have you seen Allaat ... ?
Why all of a sudden Allat and the rest of the divine female trio... were they somehow considered the signs of God? Was one of them referred to as Kubraa that there would be such a shift from the mention of revelation to a challenge to the pagans? The detour is too great and the context is a bit detached.. of course, the idea is to mention to the pagans that their understanding is twisted, but still the verses seem a bit detached, os what if there is more than meets the eye?
Now let us consider a few manuscripts from the 7th and 8th centuries CE
Patriach Patriarch Germanus (715-730)
With respect to the Saracens, since they also seem to be among those who urge these charges against us, it will be quite enough for their shame and confusion to allege against them their invocation which even to this day they make in the wilderness to a lifeless stone, namely that which is called Chobar (KBR), and the rest of their vain conversation received by tradition from their fathers as, for instance, the ludicrous mysteries of their solemn festivals.
John of Damascus (730s)
These, then, were idolators and worshippers of hte morning star and Aphrodite whom in fact they called Chabar (KBR) in their own language, which means "great." So until the times of Heraclius they were plain idolators. From that time till now a false prophet appeared among them, surnamed Muhammad (Mamed), who, having happened upon the Old and the New Testament and apparently having conversed, in like manner, with an Arian monk, put together his own heresy. And after ingratiating himself with the people by a pretence of piety, he spread rumours of a scripture (graphe) brought down to him from heaven. So, having drafted some ludicrous doctrines in his book, he handed over to them this form of worship (to sebas).
and
They misrepresent us as idolaters because we prostrate ourselves before the cross, which they loathe. And we say to them: "How then do you rub yourselves on a stone at your Ka'ba (Chabatha) and hail the stone with fond kisses?" . . . This, then, which they call "stone," is the head of Aphrodite, whom they used to worship and whom they call Chabar (KBR).
We see that the pagans are referring to Aphrodite as Kobar, which is the same root as Kuabraa and even diacritical pronounciation is too similar to discard...
This again signifies that Allat and the rest of the sub-Gods were considered as signs of Allah, and hence, the concept of Allah for the pagans was not as the "Head God" but a combined all-encompassing God, similar to the concept of Jahovah (the father, the son and the holy-spirit)...
This again, is my personal understanding so if I have made a mistake, please correct me.
Show Posts
The ch/kh sound is the same is K of Arabic, so I ask, is the Ka'BAH being spoken of here? I understand the virgin is Allat but why is she being called Chaabou amd not Chobar???