Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: quando e come Gerusalemme divenne sacra per i musulmani

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3596681,00.html
he myth of al-Aqsa
Holiness of Jerusalem to Islam has always been politically motivated
Mordechai Kedar
Published: 	09.15.08, 00:47 / Israel Opinion
When the Prophet Mohammad established Islam, he introduced a minimum
of innovations. He employed the hallowed personages, historic legends
and sacred sites of Judaism and Christianity, and even paganism, by
Islamizing them. Thus, according to Islam, Abraham was the first
Muslim and Jesus and St. John (the sons of Miriam, sister of Moses and
Aron) were prophets and guardians of the second heaven. Many Biblical
legends ("asatir al-awwalin",) which were familiar to the pagan Arabs
before the dawn of Islam, underwent an Islamic conversion, and the
Koran as well as the Hadith (the Islamic oral tradition), are replete
with them.
Islamization was practiced on places as well as persons: Mecca and the
holy stone - al-Ka'bah - were holy sites of the pre-Islamic pagan
Arabs. The Umayyad Mosque in Damascus and the Great Mosque of Istanbul
were erected on the sites of Christian-Byzantine churches - two of the
better known examples of how Islam treats sanctuaries of other faiths.
Jerusalem, too, underwent the process of Islamization: at first
Muhammad attempted to convince the Jews near Medina to join his young
community, and, by way of persuasion, established the direction of
prayer (kiblah) to be to the north, towards Jerusalem, in keeping with
Jewish practice; but after he failed in this attempt he turned against
the Jews, killed many of them, and directed the kiblah southward,
towards Mecca.
Muhammad's abandonment of Jerusalem explains the fact that this city
is not mentioned even once in the Koran. After Palestine was occupied
by the Muslims, its capital was Ramlah, 30 miles to the west of
Jerusalem, signifying that Jerusalem meant nothing to them.
Rediscovering Jerusalem
Islam rediscovered Jerusalem 50 years after Mohammad's death. In 682
CE, Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr rebelled
against the Islamic rulers in Damascus, conquered Mecca and prevented
pilgrims from reaching Mecca for the Hajj. Abd al-Malik, the Umayyad
Calif, needed an alternative site for the pilgrimage and settled on
Jerusalem which was then under his control. In order to justify this
choice, a verse from the Koran was chosen (17,1 = sura 17, verse,)
which states (translation by Majid Fakhr“Glory to Him who caused His
servant to travel by night from the Sacred Mosque to the Farthest
Mosque, whose precincts We have blessed, in order to show him some of
Our Signs, He is indeed the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing. "
The meaning ascribed to this verse is that "the furthest mosque" (al-
masgid al-aqsa) is in Jerusalem and that Mohammad was conveyed there
one night (although at that time the journey took three days by
camel,) on the back of al-Buraq, a magical horse with the head of a
woman, wings of an eagle, the tail of a peacock, and hoofs reaching to
the horizon. He tethered the horse to the Western Wall of the Temple
Mount and from there ascended to the seventh heaven together with the
angel Gabriel. On his way he met the prophets of other religions who
are the guardians of heaven.
 Miraculous account
Thus Islam tries to gain legitimacy over other, older religions, by
creating a scene in which the former prophets agree to Mohammad's
mastery, thus making him Khatam al-Anbiya ("the Seal of the
Prophets”.)
Not surprisingly, this miraculous account contradicts a number of the
tenets of Islam: How can a living man of flesh and blood ascend to
heaven? How can a mythical creature carry a mortal to a real
destination? Questions such as these have caused orthodox Muslim
thinkers to conclude that the nocturnal journey was a dream of
Mohammad's. The journey and the ascent serves Islam to "go one better"
than the Bible: Moses "only" went up to Mount Sinai, in the middle of
nowhere, and drew close to heaven, whereas Mohammad went all the way
up to Allah, and from Jerusalem itself.
What are the difficulties with the belief that the al-Aqsa mosque
described in Islamic tradition is located in Jerusalem? For one, the
people of Mecca, who knew Muhammad well, did not believe this story.
Only Abu Bakr, (later the first Calif,) believed him and thus was
called al-Siddiq (“the believer".)
The second difficulty is that Islamic tradition tells us that al-Aqsa
mosque is near Mecca on the Arabian Peninsula. This was unequivocally
stated in "Kitab al-Maghazi," a book by the Muslim historian and
geographer al-Waqidi. According to al-Waqidi, there were two
"masjeds" (places of prayer) in al-Gi'irranah, a village between Mecca
and Ta'if - one was "the closer mosque" (al-masjid al-adna) and the
other was "the further mosque" (al-masjid al-aqsa,) and Muhammad would
pray there when he went out of town.
This description by al-Waqidi which is supported by a chain of
authorities (isnad) was not "convenient" for the Islamic propaganda of
the 7th Century. In order to establish a basis for the awareness of
the "holiness" of Jerusalem in Islam, the Califs of the Ummayad
dynasty invented many “traditions" upholding the value of Jerusalem,
which would justify pilgrimage to Jerusalem for the faithful Muslims.
Thus was al-Masjid al-Aqsa "transported" to Jerusalem. It should be
noted that Saladin also adopted the myth of al-Aqsa and those
"traditions" in order to recruit and inflame the Muslim warriors
against the Crusaders in the 12th Century.
Must Judaism defer to Islamic myths?
Another aim of the Islamization of Jerusalem was to undermine the
legitimacy of the older religions, Judaism and Christianity, which
consider Jerusalem to be a holy city. Islam is presented as the only
legitimate religion, destined to replace the other two, because they
had changed and distorted the Word of God, each in its turn.
Though Judaism and Christianity can exist side by side in Jerusalem,
Islam regards both of them as betrayals of Allah and his teachings,
and has always done, and will continue to do, all in its power to
expel both of them from this city. It is interesting to note that this
expulsion is retroactive: The Islamic broadcasters of the Palestinian
radio stations consistently make it a point to claim that the Jews
never had a temple on the Temple Mount and certainly not two temples.
(Where, then, according to them, did Jesus preach?)
Yasser Arafat, himself a secular person (ask Hamas!), did exactly what
the Califs of the Umayyad dynasty did 1300 years ago: He marshaled the
holiness of Jerusalem to serve his political ends. He must not have
given control of Jerusalem over to the Jews since according to Islam
they are impure and the wrath of Allah is upon them. Moreover, the
Jews are the sons of monkeys and pigs. The Jews are those who
distorted the holy writings which were revealed to them and denied
God's signs. Since they violated the covenant with their God, He
cursed them and they are forever the inheritors of hell. So how could
Arafat hand over Jerusalem to the Jews?
The Palestinian media these days are full of messages of Jihad,
calling to broaden the national-political war between Israel and the
Palestinians into a religious-Islamic war between Jews and Muslims.
For them, Christianity is no better than Judaism, since both
“forfeited" their right to rule over Jerusalem. Only Islam - Din al-
Haqq ("the Religion of Truth") - has this right, and forever.
Since the holiness of Jerusalem to Islam has always been, and still
is, no more than a politically motivated holiness, any Muslim leader
or ruler would be putting his political head on the block should he
give it up. Must Judaism and Christianity defer to myths related in
Islamic texts or envisioned in Mohammad's dreams, long after Jerusalem
was established as the ancient, true center of these two religions,
which preceded Islam? Should Israel give up on its capital just
because some Muslims decided to recycle the political problems of the
Umayyads 1250 years after the curtain came down on their role in
history?


Abbastanza chiaro e ovvio.
Purtroppo l'abitudine a raccontar favole e balle e a far dire a Dio le cose
piu' inverosimili, risale agli Ebrei e fu ben seguita dai Cristiani.
Le tre sono simili e false nei presupposti piu' o meno allo stesso modo.
Mohammed deve aver pensato se questi hanno fondato due religioni seguite con
queste quattro balle, posso farlo anch'io.
Ne aggiungo una quinta io sono il sigillo dei profeti, per evitare che
qualche altro delirasse dopo di lui.
Faccenda delicata quella di Palestina, rassomiglia a una zuffa in un
manincomio.
Meglio starne alla larga.
Saluti
--------------------------------
Inviato via 
http://arianna.libero.it/usenet/

 Ne aggiungo una quinta
lascia perdere. A te non ti seguirebbe nessuno.