The Debate between the Might and the Truth within a Quranist Vision (20)

Sunnite Imams Admit in their Books that Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem Has Been Built on the Ruins of the Israelite Temple

Published in January 12, 2018

Translated by: Ahmed Fathy

Firstly: the Israelite origin of the so-called Al-Aqsa mosque of Jerusalem:

1- The Hebrew word for (temple) literally means the "House of God" or Beit HaElohim. As for the Israelite temple in Jerusalem, it is mentioned in the Old Testament in the Book of 1 Kings, chapters 6, 7, 8, and 9, that king Solomon continued the construction of the temple at the Temple Mount after his father, king David, initiated its construction. David was the one who moved the ark of the covenant and the Torah Tablets of Moses into Jerusalem. Solomon built the temple consecrated to God and placed the ark of the covenant and the Torah Tablets of Moses inside it. The Bible mentions that this temple's construction process took 16 years; i.e., from the 4^th year of the reign of king Solomon until the 20^th year and that Solomon brought skilled builders and bought timber from Hiram I, the Phoenician king of Tyre.  

2- As per historical references and sources, this Jewish temple of Jerusalem was built and demolished three times; it was demolished for the first time when Jerusalem was ruined and leveled to the ground in 587 B.C. by the Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar, who enslaved most of its inhabitants and sent them to Mesopotamia. The Jewish temple was rebuilt in c. 515 -520 B.C., and it was demolished for the second time by the king Antiochus IV, of a Greek Macedonian royal family, the Seleucids who formed the Seleucid empire, and this king crushed and quelled the rebellion of the Jewish Maccabees and destroyed the Jewish temple in 170 B.C. The Jewish temple of Jerusalem was rebuilt for the third time by Herod who was made the king of the Jews in 40 B.C. with the help of the Romans. The Jewish temple, as well as the city of Jerusalem, was demolished for the third time by the Romans in 70 A.D. By the way, Jerusalem was earlier named in Hebrew as Beit HaMikdash, but this appellation has been transformed in the Arabic tongue into Bayt Al-Maqdis and then Al-Quds.

3- Hence, within its long history, Jerusalem was leveled to the ground twice, sieged 23 times, attacked 52 times, and (re)conquered 44 times. The location of Jerusalem has been inhabited since before 4000 B.C., and this means that Jerusalem is one of the oldest inhabited cities in the world. The Jewish religious importance of the city has been established only when king David conquered it and made it the capital for the kingdom of Israel, in c. 1000 B.C. The Christian religious importance of Jerusalem has been established as per the Christian notion that Jesus Christ was crucified at one mount near the city in c. 30 A.D. This story is refuted in the Quran that asserts that Jesus died a natural death and was never put to death by anyone.

4- The radical change of Jerusalem occurred when it was conquered by Arabs, at the time when Arab conquests went on to annex countries east and west during the reign of the caliphs Abou Bakr, Omar, and Othman. Jerusalem remained within Arab hands for about 13 centuries (without adding the period when European crusaders conquered the city). Jerusalem is located nearly in the middle of the Arab empire (or the so-called 'Islamic' world) whose borders stretched between Middle Asia to the Pyrenees, south of France. With the passage of the centuries, Jerusalem has acquired an Arab nature and it has become a holy city within the earthly, man-made religions of the Muhammadans; the Muhammadans even sanctify and deify the Arab conquerors, especially the pre-Umayyad caliphs.   

5- Thus, the first temple of Solomon was destroyed, and the second temple was rebuilt on the same site in c. 515 -520 B.C. When the Romans destroyed the temple for the last time in 70 A.D., part of its foundations remained, including the Israelite rock and a wall known today as the Western Wall. The Umayyad caliph, Abdul-Malik Ibn Marwan used such foundations to build his so-called Al-Aqsa mosque of Jerusalem and the dome of the rock mosque in c. 691 A.D. Hence, this means the temple of Solomon was overshadowed as a mere phantom inside the so-called Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem, which stole from it the alleged holiness or sanctity. Thus, the so-called Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem had its new followers who sanctified and deified the edifice and fabricated many hadiths about this, in addition to inventing certain laws and rituals regarding worshiping it, worshiping at it, and performing pilgrimage to it. This sham/fake sanctification increased with the passage of time until it has become now a deep-seated notion necessarily known of the Sunnite religion of the Muhammadans, though it is based on myths and lies typical of all earthly, man-made religions that make their followers deify and sanctify mortals and things/items/relics.      

6- The additional or new element here is stealing things of others; the so-called Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem stole the location of the Israelite temple and its remaining Western Wall from its ruins (deemed as holy by some Jews now) known now as the Wailing Wall; the Muhammadans assumed that this wall is 'holy' as Muhammad allegedly during the Night-Journey and the myth of his ascension to heaven tied the rope of the steed to this wall once he presumably reached Jerusalem on this flying steed, before remounting it to fly into the sky! The Sunnite narratives makes this wall 'holy' and names it asAl-Buraq Wall. The Sunnite narratives mention that this mythical creature, Al-Buraq, was a large, white steed bigger than donkeys and mules and smaller than mares. Was it a colt pedigree, for instance?!

Secondly: there is no mention at all of the so-called Al-Aqsa mosque of Jerusalem in history-book by Al-Tabari in his accounts of the Arab conquest of Jerusalem:

1- The history of Al-Tabari is a seminal, authoritative book/reference of the history of Arabs; Al-Tabari (c. 224 – 310 A.H.) is still an esteemed, trusted historian in the Arab world. Al-Tabari has never mentioned the so-called Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem at all in his accounts about the Arab conquest of the Levantine region and Jerusalem. This means that the so-called Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem never existed when the caliph Omar Ibn Al-Khattab conquered Jerusalem and visited it to receive its keys in 16 A.H. Consequently, if Muhammad's Night-Journey mentioned in 17:1 had been to the so-called Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem as Sunnites claim, Arabs would have clamored and demanded from the caliph Omar, or the caliph Abou Bakr before him, to readily conquer Jerusalem to lay their hands on the Farthest Mosque mentioned in the Quran. This did not occur, of course, and Jerusalem contained no mosques at all when Omar conquered it, and Omar never knew about this myth of the so-called Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem formulated in the Umayyad Era later on. This means that at this point in time, there was no such a thing known as Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem.  

2- Al-Tabari writes these details about the Arab conquest of Jerusalem in 636/637 A.D.; he mentions that the caliph Omar journeyed to Jerusalem itself in 16 A.H., and the city was known for the Romans asIliya, reflecting the Roman name given to the city following the destruction of 70 B.C. Aelia Capitolin. Omar went there in order to receive the keys of the city. Al-Tabari mentions that Omar performed prayers within a site purportedly known as the masjid (mihrab/mehrab or niche) of David, within the ruins of the temple of Solomon, and he prostrated on the ground and those men with him imitated him, in this Israelite site by night. Thus, this means that there was no such a thing at this point in time known as Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem at all; otherwise, Omar would have performed prayers inside it. When Omar thought to build the first mosque inside Jerusalem, he consulted the Israelite rabbi (presumably a convert to 'Islam') Kaab Al-Ahbar (a name in Arabic which means "the grand rabbi") about the suitable location for a new mosque, and Kaab Al-Ahbar advised him to build it on the Israelite rock which was among the ruins of the temple of Solomon. Omar adamantly refused and he accused Kaab Al-Ahbar of harboring still some Jewish sympathies and Israelite tendencies though he claimed to be a 'Muslim'. Omar later on chose another location for a small, ordinary mosque which he built.  

Thirdly: the Sunnite Hanbali authors Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Al-Qayyim criticize in their writings the sanctification of the rock of Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem:

1- The Sufi religion dominated the Mameluke Era in Egypt and the Levant; this resulted in the spread of the polytheistic notion of worshipping sanctified stones/relics and 'holy' mausoleums. Thus, the Israelite rock of Jerusalem was deemed as very holy, and this is still manifested in many hadiths and rituals of the Muhammadans. Such wretched state of affairs troubled very much the Sunnite Hanbali scholar/author Ibn Taymiyya and his disciple, the scholar/author Ibn Al-Qayyim, as both men saw such polytheism as evil sanctification and worship of things of Israelite origin; this was blasphemous for both men.  

2- Ibn Taymiyya mentions in his book about his fatwas regarding rituals of visiting (for pilgrimage) any 'holy' sites/mausoleums that Muhammad's companions and their followers of other generations never sanctified or worshipped at this Israelite rock of Jerusalem; Ibn Taymiyya refutes the views held by the ignoramuses that the footprints of Muhammad (and a piece of his cloak!) are on the rock, as he dismissed such views as utter lies. Ibn Taymiyya asserts that it is a flagrant lie and a blasphemous idea to assume that this Israelite rock of Jerusalem is the foothold of God, cradle of Jesus, place of Christians' baptism, place of the Scales of the Last Day, place of the hair-narrow bridge to Paradise overlooking Hell, or place for the wall between Hell and Paradise in the Hereafter. Ibn Taymiyya further refutes the assumed holiness (by 'Muslims') of the Jewish wall near the mosque among other relics and landmarks. Ibn Taymiyya mentions that the Israelite rock of Jerusalem was a Qibla only for Jews within their diaspora after the destruction of their temple, and its worship must be rejected by Muslims as their Qibla is the Kaaba, and this applies to never observing the Sabbath as this is never ordained in the Quran at all. Thus, Ibn Taymiyya here admits that this Israelite rock was a Qibla for some Jews; it has nothing to do with Islam.  

3- As for Ibn Al-Qayyim, he refutes and undermines all Sunnite hadiths pertaining to sanctification of this Israelite rock, mentioning that they are fabricated hadiths, in his book about differentiating between false hadiths and 'true' ones as per the Hanbali criterion. Ibn Al-Qayyim further mentions that all hadiths about this Israelite rock are false and its footprints (ascribed to Muhammad) are fake as they are carved by evil polytheists who desire to gain more money by urging many people to visit Jerusalem as pilgrims. Ibn Al-Qayyim asserts that this Israelite rock was a Qibla for Jews who prayed toward its direction as a locational holy of holies to them as much as the Sabbath was a holy day in every week for them. Ibn Al-Qayyim asserts that the true believers must perform prayers only toward the direction of the Kaaba in Mecca. Thus, Ibn Al-Qayyim here admits that this Israelite rock was a Qibla for some Jews; it has nothing to do with Islam. 

4- Ibn Taymiyya writes that the hadiths and myths of the sanctification of this Israelite rock of Jerusalem spread by oral narrators and orators once the Umayyad caliph, Abdul-Malik Ibn Marwan, built the so-called dome of the rock mosque; this made narrators copy and imitate Israelite traditions regarding this spot in Jerusalem. Ibn Taymiyya writes further that this so-called Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem has nothing to do with Islam and has no origin at all, as it was an invention by this Umayyad caliph. In fact, Ibn Taymiyya writes in his collections of booklets or short writings (in No. 61/2) that the so-called Al-Aqsa was built by this caliph over the ruins of a temple ascribed to Solomon; thus, Ibn Taymiyya here admits that there is an Israelite origin to this harmful mosque. Ibn Taymiyya mentions that the caliph Omar Ibn Al-Khattab built a small, ordinary mosque in Jerusalem, without giving it a name, and imams of the Umma liked to perform prayers in it in later eras. Ibn Taymiyya mentions further that neither Omar nor any other companions of Muhammad ever performed prayers at this Israelite rock, which had no dome and no significance at all to Arabs at the time; it had no roof at all during the caliphates of Omar, Othman, Ali, Mu'aweiya, Yazeed, and Marwan. Marwan was the father of Abdul-Malik Ibn Marwan. Thus, until the caliphate of Abdul-Malik Ibn Marwan, there was no such a thing as Al-Aqsa of Jerusalem; rather, a small, ordinary mosque built by Omar that had nothing to do with this Israelite rock of the ruined temple; it was so insignificant as a rock that no one ever paid attention to it at the time before the caliphate of Abdul-Malik Ibn Marwan. Ibn Taymiyya writes further that this Israelite rock was a Qibla for some Jews and is deemed as 'holy' by some Jews and some Christians in Jerusalem. Ibn Taymiyya mentions that it remained roofless and considered insignificant for decades by all companions, governors of the Levant, and scholars/imams at the time, and no one worshipped at it at all before the caliphate of Abdul-Malik Ibn Marwan. Ibn Taymiyya writes further that whoever would worship at this Israelite rock, circle around it, slaughter sacrificial animals there before it must be deemed as an apostate and a heretic who must be put to death, as per the fatwas of Ibn Taymiyya.