EGYPT IN THE QURAN AND TORAH: Geographical Setting of Egypt

The Quran (הקראן) and Torah (מקרא) are the heavenly texts of HASHEM. Both have the same episteme. 

ויהי רבע בארץ וירד אברם מצימה

Va yehi ra’av be eretz va yered Avram Mitzreyemah ….” 

” There was a famine in the land, and Abram descended to Egypt …..”

Mikra, Sefer Bereshit 12:10

اهبطوا مصرا فان لكم ما سالتم 

” …. Ihbithu Mishra fa inna lakum ma sa’altum.”

” …. descend to Egypt and there you will find what you have asked for.” 

Quran in Arabic, Al-Baqarah 2:61

לכו ירד מצרימה ומצאתם שם את אשר שאלתם

” ….. lechu yered Mitzrayemah u-metzetem shem et asher she’elthem ….. ” 

” … go down to Egypt and there you will find what you have asked for.”

Quran in Hebrew, Al-Baqarah 2:61

The Quranic term اهبطوا (ihbithu), is a unique, meaning ” go down ” or ” dencend to.” This Arabic term is to refer to the geographical setting, from the upland to the lowland. And based on this verse, the word اهبطوا (ihbithu) is to migrate from the higher terrain of Canaan to the lowland as another place, Egypt.

Meanwhile, the Masoretic term ירד (yered) is exactly the same, indeed similar in Hebrew lexicon. The Hebrew term ירד ( yered) means ‘went down’ or ‘ descended to ‘ is the usual term used in the Torah for the pessage from the higher terrain of Canaan. The journey to Canaan is always referred to as עלה (‘oleh), meaning ” going up.” Thus, Egypt land is the lowland in the light of the Quran and the Torah.

Based on both Scriptures, I have to say to you all that Egypt is a lowland in an academic paradigm. Avraham avinu ‘alayv ha-shalom descended to Egypt, and Moshe rabbenu ‘alayv ha-shalom order to the b’ney Yisrael to descend to Egypt. 

Baruch HASHEM

SIRAH AL-MASIH DAJJAL: “Mshikha Daggala” dari Teks Peshitta Aramaik hingga teks Islam.


Wacana terkait Al-Masih Dajjal (المسيح الدجال) tidak saja dikenal dalam literatur Islam, tetapi wacana Al-Masih Dajjal ternyata juga dikenal dalam literatur yang lebih kuno di Timur Tengah, terutama pada dokumen agama-agama Semitik, yang merujuk pada tradisi agama Yahudi dan tradisi agama Kristen. Dalam teks Peshitta abad ke-5 M., yang ditulis dalam bahasa Syro-Aramaic, istilah Al-Masih ad-Dajjal (المسيح الدجال) dikenal dengan sebutan Mshikha Daggala (ܡܫܝܚܐ ܕܓܠܐ), sedangkan dalam literatur Ibrani ternyata istilah tersebut disebut dengan sebutan Meshikhei sheqer (משיחי שקר). Meskipun berbeda dalam pelafalan diksinya, tetapi ketiganya merujuk pada makna yang sama, yaitu Mesias palsu – the false Messiah.


Injil Matius 24:24 versi Peshitta menyebutkan demikian.

ܢܩܽܘܡܽܘܢ ܓ݁ܶܝܪ ܡܫܺܝܚܶܐ ܕ݁ܰܓ݁ܳܠܶܐ ܘܰܢܒ݂ܺܝܶܐ ܕ݁ܟ݂ܰܕ݁ܳܒ݂ܽܘܬ݂ܳܐ ܘܢܶܬ݁ܠܽܘܢ ܐܳܬ݂ܘܳܬ݂ܳܐ ܪܰܘܪܒ݂ܳܬ݂ܳܐ ܐܰܝܟ݂ ܕ݁ܢܰܛܥܽܘܢ ܐܶܢ ܡܶܫܟ݁ܚܳܐ ܐܳܦ݂ ܠܰܓ݂ܒ݂ܰܝܳܐ ܀ 

Nqumun geir Mshikhe Daggale wa neviyye d’kaddavuta, w’nitlun atwata rawrwata. Eyk d’nath’on in mishkta af lagvayya.

Matthew 24:24 – For there shall arise false messiahs and prophets of untruth; and they shall give forth magnificent signs, so as to seduce, if possible, the chosen also.


Karena akan datang banyak Al-Masih palsu dan nabi-nabi palsu. Mereka akan memberikan tanda-tanda ajaib yang dahsyat serta juga berbagai mukjizat, supaya kalau bisa, mereka menyesatkan orang-orang pilihan-Nya juga


Sementara itu, teks Injil Matius 24:24 versi bahasa Arab tertulis demikian [1]:


فسيظهر مسحاء دجالون وانبياء كذابون يصنعون الايات والعجاءب العظيمة ليضللوا ان امكن حتى الذين اختراهم الله


“Sebab Mesias-mesias palsu dan nabi-nabi palsu akan muncul, dan mereka akan mengadakan tanda-tanda yang dahsyat dan mujizat-mujizat, sehingga sekiranya mungkin, mereka menyesatkan orang-orang pilihan juga.”


Ayat suci yang termaktub dalam Matius 24:24 yang tertulis dengan menggunakan istilah Syro-Aramaic ܡܫܝܼܚܹܐ ܕܲܓ̈ܵܠܹܐ (Mšīkhe daggale), ternyata ada kesejajaran episteme dengan istilah Arab, yakni مسحاء دجالون (Musakha-u dajjalun). Dan istilah Syro-Aramaic ܡܫܝܼܚܹܐ ܕܲܓ̈ܵܠܹܐ (Mšīkhe daggale) sebagaimana yang termaktub dalam teks Peshitta tersebut, ternyata berdasar pada kajian semantik leksikal bermakna ganda; yakni merujuk pada makna “the Anointed Ones” dalam konteks agamis dan politis.

Dalam Injil Matius 24:24 itu memang tertulis term plural, yakni ܡܫܝܼܚܹܐ ܕܲܓ̈ܵܠܹܐ Mšīkhe daggale. Pada istilah tersebut terdapat penanda “seyame” yakni sebagai penanda bentuk plural (jamak) atas kata Mšīkhe, yg secara maknawi membuktikan akan adanya ‘mesias-mesias’ yg ‘palsu’ (daggale – adjective, plural). Ayat ini mengkonfirmasi akan adanya kemunculan lebih dari seorang ‘mesias’ selain dari Al-Masih ad-Dajjal itu sendiri.


Teks Perjanjian Baru, terutama yang termaktub dalam nas (I Yohanes 2:22), ternyata juga mencatat bahwa Al-Masih ad-Dajjal (المسيح الدجال) merupakan sosok yang kontras dari Yesus (Isa) yang disebut sebagai Al-Masih (المسيح), sebagaimana catatan kitab suci [2]:.


فمن هو الكذاب الا الذي ينكر ان يسوع هو المسيح. هذا هو المسيح الدجال الذي ينكر الاب والابن معا.


fa man huwa al-kadzdzab illa alladzi yunkiru inna Yasu’ huwa Al-Masih. Hadza huwa Al-Masih ad-Dajjal alladzi yunkiru Al-Ab wal Ibn ma’an.


(Siapakah dia sang pendusta itu? Bukankah dia yang menyangkal bahwa Yesus adalah Al-Masih? Dia itu adalah Al-Masih ad-Dajjal, yaitu dia yang menyangkal baik Bapa maupun Anak),


Menariknya, teks Peshitta berbahasa Syro-Aramaic menyebut المسيح الدجال (Al-Masih ad-Dajjal) dengan sebutan ܡܫܝܚܐ ܕܓܠܐ (Mshikha Daggala). Nas tersebut dengan ungkapan demikian:

ܡܰܢܽܘ ܕ݁ܰܓ݁ܳܠܳܐ ܐܶܠܳܐ ܐܶܢ ܐܰܝܢܳܐ ܕ݁ܟ݂ܳܦ݂ܰܪ ܕ݁ܝܶܫܽܘܥ ܠܳܐ ܗ݈ܘܳܐ ܡܫܺܝܚܳܐ ܗܳܢܳܐ ܗܽܘ ܡܫܺܝܚܳܐ ܕ݁ܰܓ݁ܳܠܳܐ ܗܰܘ ܕ݁ܟ݂ܳܦ݂ܰܪ ܒ݁ܰܐܒ݂ܳܐ ܟ݁ܳܦ݂ܰܪ ܐܳܦ݂ ܒ݁ܰܒ݂ܪܳܐ ܀ 

Mennu daggala ella in ayna d’kafar d’Isho la hawa Mshikha we hanaw ܡܫܝܚܐ ܕܓܠܐ – Mshikha Daggala. Haw d’kafar be Aba kafar af be Bra.

Who is a liar, if not he who denieth that Jesus is the Messiah? and this (one) is a false meshiha. He who denieth the Father, denieth also the Son;


Studi sejarah bangsa Yahudi pasca Isa (Yesus) serta munculnya klaim orang-orang yang mengaku sebagai ‘mesias-mesias’ dalam hal ini sangat penting utk dikaji, terutama bukunya Max Isaac Dimont dalam karyanya “Jews, God and History” (2018), dan bukunya Reza Aslan berjudul “Zealot: the Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth” (New York: Random House, 2013).

Pax-Britannica, Fase ke-1


Tanda-tanda kemunculan Dajjal memang sudah dirasakan dalam tahun-tahun terakhir ini, yang ditandai adanya maraknya fitnah dan makar dimana-mana. Dajjal sendiri pun sudah disambut kedatangannya sejak berdirinya negara Israel pada tahun 1948, dan berdirinya negara Saudi Arabia pada tahun 1932 yang diprakarsai Pax-Britanica yang didirikan di bekas wilayah imperium Islam Ottoman pasca kekalahan poros Jerman dalam Perang Dunia I (PD ke-1). Itulah sebabnya, ada hubungan rahasia yang sangat mesra antara Israel – Saudi Arabia – UK tatkala kedua negara, yakni Israel dan Saudi Arabia didirikan, dan juga ada hubungan mesra antara Saudi Arabia – Israel – USA saat kota Yerusalem dijadikan sebagai ibukota resmi oleh negara Israel.


Persiapan kedatangan Dajjal pada fase ke-1 telah dimulai, yakni dengan berdirinya negara Israel, yang didirikan oleh orang-orang Jewish Zionists atas nama klaim agama Yahudi, meskipun kaum mayoritas Yahudi Ortodoks menolaknya. Sementara itu, negara Saudi Arabia juga telah didirikan oleh orang-orang Muslim Zionists atas nama klaim agama Islam, meskipun kaum mayoritas Muslim Sunni telah menolaknya. Tentu Anda masih ingat tokoh besar Zionist yang terlibat atas berdirinya negara Saudi Arabia, yakni Thomas Edward Lawrence yang dikenal sebagai Prince Lawrence of Arabia. Silakan Anda membaca buku penting karya Sir Ronald Storrs berjudul “Lawrence of Arabia: Zionism and Palestine” (New York: Penguin Books, 1937), dan karyanya Imran N. Hosein berjudul “The Caliphate, the Hejaz and the Saudi-Wahabi Nation-State” (New York: Masjid Dar al-Qur’an, 1996).

Pax-Americana, fase ke-2


Kini, fase ke-2 untuk menyambut kedatangan Dajjal juga dipersiapkan, yakni adanya pengakuan secara de jure atas kota Yerusalem sebagai ibukota resmi negara Israel oleh Saudi Arabia dan USA. Pada fase ke-1 ini banyak buku telah ditulis, yakni adanya gelombang migrasi kaum Yahudi secara besar-besaran menuju tanah Palestina, dan migrasi besar-besaran ini terjadi sejak tahun 1948 hingga kini. Berkaitan dengan persoalan gelombang migrasi kaum Yahudi ke tanah Palestina dan konflik yang melingkupinya, maka para pembaca dapat membaca 3 buku penting para sejarawan Yahudi berikut ini:

  1. (“The Fateful Triangle: Israel, the United States and the Palestines” karya Prof. Noam Chomsky (Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1984),
  2. “War and Peace in the Middle East: A Concise History” karya Prof. Aim Shlaim (New York: Penguin Books, 1995),
  3. “One State, Two States: Resolving the Israel/Palestine Conflict” karya Prof. Benny Morris (New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2009).


Ketiga karya sejarawan Yahudi tersebut mewakili cara pandang yang berbeda, yang dua anti-Zionis, sedangkan yang satu pro-Zionis. Ketiganya dikenal sebagai “historian” yang sekarang sering dinamakan sebagai “mazhab sejarawan baru (New Historian)”. Ketiga profesor dengan pandangan yang berbeda bahkan berlawanan ini akan memberikan pandangan yang tidak sederhana tentang apa yang terjadi di kawasan Timur Tengah, khususnya terkait konflik Israel – Palestina. Ketiga profesor tersebut menggunakan sumber data dalam negeri mereka. Prof. Ilan Pappe dan Prof. Benny Morris keduanya terkenal menggunakan sumber utama Israel, termasuk sumber paramiliter dan tulisan langsung para “Bapak Bangsa” sebelum negara Israel itu berdiri. Namun, keduanya memiliki pandangan yang bertolak belakang dan kesimpulan yang berbeda pula, meskipun hal itu merujuk pada sumber data yang sama. Sementara itu, Prof. Noam Chomsky adalah seorang ahli bahasa dan politik, sekaligus pengamat Amerika yang sangat kritis menilai kebijakan luar negeri USA.


Fakta fase ke-2 terkait persiapan kedatangan Dajjal adalah penahbisan kota Yerusalem sebagai ibukota resmi negara Israel. Maulana Imran N. Hosein telah menyatakan betapa pentingnya kota suci Jerusalem sebagai tanda Akhir Zaman, dan beliau ternyata telah menulis buku ttng Jerusalem tersebut pada tahun 2002. Itu artinya, sebelum Presiden USA Donald Trump secara resmi mengumumkan Jerusalem pada tahun 2017 sebagai ibukota negara Israel, maka Maulana Imran N. Hosein sendiri sudah menyatakannya. Dalam bukunya “Jerusalem in the Quran: An Islamic View of the Destiny of Jerusalem” (San Fernando: Masjid Jamiah, 2002), hlm. 21 Maulana Imran N. Hosein mengatakan: “the book begins, appropriately with the mystery of Jerusalem, the town in the Quran. Perhaps the reason for a mysterious treatment of the subject is because Islam has taught that Jerusalem is destined to play a central crucial role in the Last Age.”


Sejarah telah membuktikan. Pada tgl. 6 Desember 2017, presiden USA Donald Trump telah menyatakan dan mengakui Yerusalem sebagai ibukota Israel, dan presiden Donald Trump sendiri telah mengumumkan akan segera memindahkan kedutaan USA dari kota Tel-Aviv ke kota Yerusalem. Pada tgl. 23 Februari 2018, Departemen Luar Negeri USA juga mengumumkan kembali bahwa Kedutaan Besar USA secara resmi akan dibuka di Yerusalem pada tgl. 14 Mei 2018, bertepatan dengan 70 tahun berdirinya negara Israel. Kini, Kedutaan Besar USA di Israel terletak di kawasan Arnona, Yerusalem Barat. Ini adalah fakta sejarah yang tidak bisa ditolak oleh siapapun. USA dan Saudi Arabia kini telah mengakui Yerusalam sebagai ibukota resmi negara Israel secara de jure. Bahkan, Saudi Arabia sangat begitu dekat dan akrab dengan Israel.


Pax-Judaica, fase ke-3


Fase ke-3 utk menyambut Dajjal akan segera terjadi. Dajjal akan segera bertahta di Singgasana Solomo, Raja Israel. Guru mulia Maulana Imran N. Hosein telah menulis 3 buah buku berkaitan dengan tema besar ini, yakni

  1. “Jerusalem in the Quran: An Islamic View of the Destiny of Jerusalem” (2002),
  2. “Dajjal the Quran and Awwal al-Zaman: the Beginning of History” (2017),
  3. “The Quran, Dajjal and the Jasad” (2019).

Pada fase ke-3 tersebut, kedatangan Dajjal akan ditandai dengan sebuah tanda besar, yakni adanya pembangunan Bait Suci ke-3 di atas reruntuhan Masjid Al-Aqsa. Inilah tanda kehadiran sebenarnya dari Al-Masih Dajjal.

Rashi dan Rambam telah menyebutkan mengenai adanya pembangunan Bait Suci ke-3 sebagai Beyt ha-Miqdas tatkala Mesias yang ditungu-tunggu itu datang, sebagaimana yang tercatat dalam Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Melachim 11:1,4 dan Talmud Yerushalmi, masechet Megillah 1:11.

Sirah Al-Masih Dajjal Bag.1: Keterkaitan Al-Masihu Dajjal dgn Yesus, Adam, Saudi, Israel & Yerusalem

Footnotes:

  1. Alkitab: Al-Kitab al-Muqaddas. Arab – Indonesia. ‘Arabiy – Indunisiy (Jakarta: Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia, 2003), hlm. 86
  2. Alkitab: Al-Kitab al-Muqaddas. Arab – Indonesia. ‘Arabiy – Indunisiy (Jakarta: Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia, 3003), hlm. 765.

SIRAH AL-MASIH DAJJAL: "Mshikha Daggala" dari Teks Peshitta Aramaik hingga teks Islam.


Wacana terkait Al-Masih Dajjal (المسيح الدجال) tidak saja dikenal dalam literatur Islam, tetapi wacana Al-Masih Dajjal ternyata juga dikenal dalam literatur yang lebih kuno di Timur Tengah, terutama pada dokumen agama-agama Semitik, yang merujuk pada tradisi agama Yahudi dan tradisi agama Kristen. Dalam teks Peshitta abad ke-5 M., yang ditulis dalam bahasa Syro-Aramaic, istilah Al-Masih ad-Dajjal (المسيح الدجال) dikenal dengan sebutan Mshikha Daggala (ܡܫܝܚܐ ܕܓܠܐ), sedangkan dalam literatur Ibrani ternyata istilah tersebut disebut dengan sebutan Meshikhei sheqer (משיחי שקר). Meskipun berbeda dalam pelafalan diksinya, tetapi ketiganya merujuk pada makna yang sama, yaitu Mesias palsu – the false Messiah.


Injil Matius 24:24 versi Peshitta menyebutkan demikian.

ܢܩܽܘܡܽܘܢ ܓ݁ܶܝܪ ܡܫܺܝܚܶܐ ܕ݁ܰܓ݁ܳܠܶܐ ܘܰܢܒ݂ܺܝܶܐ ܕ݁ܟ݂ܰܕ݁ܳܒ݂ܽܘܬ݂ܳܐ ܘܢܶܬ݁ܠܽܘܢ ܐܳܬ݂ܘܳܬ݂ܳܐ ܪܰܘܪܒ݂ܳܬ݂ܳܐ ܐܰܝܟ݂ ܕ݁ܢܰܛܥܽܘܢ ܐܶܢ ܡܶܫܟ݁ܚܳܐ ܐܳܦ݂ ܠܰܓ݂ܒ݂ܰܝܳܐ ܀

Nqumun geir Mshikhe Daggale wa neviyye d’kaddavuta, w’nitlun atwata rawrwata. Eyk d’nath’on in mishkta af lagvayya.

Matthew 24:24 – For there shall arise false messiahs and prophets of untruth; and they shall give forth magnificent signs, so as to seduce, if possible, the chosen also.


Karena akan datang banyak Al-Masih palsu dan nabi-nabi palsu. Mereka akan memberikan tanda-tanda ajaib yang dahsyat serta juga berbagai mukjizat, supaya kalau bisa, mereka menyesatkan orang-orang pilihan-Nya juga


Sementara itu, teks Injil Matius 24:24 versi bahasa Arab tertulis demikian [1]:


فسيظهر مسحاء دجالون وانبياء كذابون يصنعون الايات والعجاءب العظيمة ليضللوا ان امكن حتى الذين اختراهم الله


“Sebab Mesias-mesias palsu dan nabi-nabi palsu akan muncul, dan mereka akan mengadakan tanda-tanda yang dahsyat dan mujizat-mujizat, sehingga sekiranya mungkin, mereka menyesatkan orang-orang pilihan juga.”


Ayat suci yang termaktub dalam Matius 24:24 yang tertulis dengan menggunakan istilah Syro-Aramaic ܡܫܝܼܚܹܐ ܕܲܓ̈ܵܠܹܐ (Mšīkhe daggale), ternyata ada kesejajaran episteme dengan istilah Arab, yakni مسحاء دجالون (Musakha-u dajjalun). Dan istilah Syro-Aramaic ܡܫܝܼܚܹܐ ܕܲܓ̈ܵܠܹܐ (Mšīkhe daggale) sebagaimana yang termaktub dalam teks Peshitta tersebut, ternyata berdasar pada kajian semantik leksikal bermakna ganda; yakni merujuk pada makna “the Anointed Ones” dalam konteks agamis dan politis.

Dalam Injil Matius 24:24 itu memang tertulis term plural, yakni ܡܫܝܼܚܹܐ ܕܲܓ̈ܵܠܹܐ Mšīkhe daggale. Pada istilah tersebut terdapat penanda “seyame” yakni sebagai penanda bentuk plural (jamak) atas kata Mšīkhe, yg secara maknawi membuktikan akan adanya ‘mesias-mesias’ yg ‘palsu’ (daggale – adjective, plural). Ayat ini mengkonfirmasi akan adanya kemunculan lebih dari seorang ‘mesias’ selain dari Al-Masih ad-Dajjal itu sendiri.


Teks Perjanjian Baru, terutama yang termaktub dalam nas (I Yohanes 2:22), ternyata juga mencatat bahwa Al-Masih ad-Dajjal (المسيح الدجال) merupakan sosok yang kontras dari Yesus (Isa) yang disebut sebagai Al-Masih (المسيح), sebagaimana catatan kitab suci [2]:.


فمن هو الكذاب الا الذي ينكر ان يسوع هو المسيح. هذا هو المسيح الدجال الذي ينكر الاب والابن معا.


fa man huwa al-kadzdzab illa alladzi yunkiru inna Yasu’ huwa Al-Masih. Hadza huwa Al-Masih ad-Dajjal alladzi yunkiru Al-Ab wal Ibn ma’an.


(Siapakah dia sang pendusta itu? Bukankah dia yang menyangkal bahwa Yesus adalah Al-Masih? Dia itu adalah Al-Masih ad-Dajjal, yaitu dia yang menyangkal baik Bapa maupun Anak),


Menariknya, teks Peshitta berbahasa Syro-Aramaic menyebut المسيح الدجال (Al-Masih ad-Dajjal) dengan sebutan ܡܫܝܚܐ ܕܓܠܐ (Mshikha Daggala). Nas tersebut dengan ungkapan demikian:

ܡܰܢܽܘ ܕ݁ܰܓ݁ܳܠܳܐ ܐܶܠܳܐ ܐܶܢ ܐܰܝܢܳܐ ܕ݁ܟ݂ܳܦ݂ܰܪ ܕ݁ܝܶܫܽܘܥ ܠܳܐ ܗ݈ܘܳܐ ܡܫܺܝܚܳܐ ܗܳܢܳܐ ܗܽܘ ܡܫܺܝܚܳܐ ܕ݁ܰܓ݁ܳܠܳܐ ܗܰܘ ܕ݁ܟ݂ܳܦ݂ܰܪ ܒ݁ܰܐܒ݂ܳܐ ܟ݁ܳܦ݂ܰܪ ܐܳܦ݂ ܒ݁ܰܒ݂ܪܳܐ ܀ 

Mennu daggala ella in ayna d’kafar d’Isho la hawa Mshikha we hanaw ܡܫܝܚܐ ܕܓܠܐ – Mshikha Daggala. Haw d’kafar be Aba kafar af be Bra.

Who is a liar, if not he who denieth that Jesus is the Messiah? and this (one) is a false meshiha. He who denieth the Father, denieth also the Son;


Studi sejarah bangsa Yahudi pasca Isa (Yesus) serta munculnya klaim orang-orang yang mengaku sebagai ‘mesias-mesias’ dalam hal ini sangat penting utk dikaji, terutama bukunya Max Isaac Dimont dalam karyanya “Jews, God and History” (2018), dan bukunya Reza Aslan berjudul “Zealot: the Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth” (New York: Random House, 2013).

Pax-Britannica, Fase ke-1


Tanda-tanda kemunculan Dajjal memang sudah dirasakan dalam tahun-tahun terakhir ini, yang ditandai adanya maraknya fitnah dan makar dimana-mana. Dajjal sendiri pun sudah disambut kedatangannya sejak berdirinya negara Israel pada tahun 1948, dan berdirinya negara Saudi Arabia pada tahun 1932 yang diprakarsai Pax-Britanica yang didirikan di bekas wilayah imperium Islam Ottoman pasca kekalahan poros Jerman dalam Perang Dunia I (PD ke-1). Itulah sebabnya, ada hubungan rahasia yang sangat mesra antara Israel – Saudi Arabia – UK tatkala kedua negara, yakni Israel dan Saudi Arabia didirikan, dan juga ada hubungan mesra antara Saudi Arabia – Israel – USA saat kota Yerusalem dijadikan sebagai ibukota resmi oleh negara Israel.


Persiapan kedatangan Dajjal pada fase ke-1 telah dimulai, yakni dengan berdirinya negara Israel, yang didirikan oleh orang-orang Jewish Zionists atas nama klaim agama Yahudi, meskipun kaum mayoritas Yahudi Ortodoks menolaknya. Sementara itu, negara Saudi Arabia juga telah didirikan oleh orang-orang Muslim Zionists atas nama klaim agama Islam, meskipun kaum mayoritas Muslim Sunni telah menolaknya. Tentu Anda masih ingat tokoh besar Zionist yang terlibat atas berdirinya negara Saudi Arabia, yakni Thomas Edward Lawrence yang dikenal sebagai Prince Lawrence of Arabia. Silakan Anda membaca buku penting karya Sir Ronald Storrs berjudul “Lawrence of Arabia: Zionism and Palestine” (New York: Penguin Books, 1937), dan karyanya Imran N. Hosein berjudul “The Caliphate, the Hejaz and the Saudi-Wahabi Nation-State” (New York: Masjid Dar al-Qur’an, 1996).

Pax-Americana, fase ke-2


Kini, fase ke-2 untuk menyambut kedatangan Dajjal juga dipersiapkan, yakni adanya pengakuan secara de jure atas kota Yerusalem sebagai ibukota resmi negara Israel oleh Saudi Arabia dan USA. Pada fase ke-1 ini banyak buku telah ditulis, yakni adanya gelombang migrasi kaum Yahudi secara besar-besaran menuju tanah Palestina, dan migrasi besar-besaran ini terjadi sejak tahun 1948 hingga kini. Berkaitan dengan persoalan gelombang migrasi kaum Yahudi ke tanah Palestina dan konflik yang melingkupinya, maka para pembaca dapat membaca 3 buku penting para sejarawan Yahudi berikut ini:

  1. (“The Fateful Triangle: Israel, the United States and the Palestines” karya Prof. Noam Chomsky (Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1984),
  2. “War and Peace in the Middle East: A Concise History” karya Prof. Aim Shlaim (New York: Penguin Books, 1995),
  3. “One State, Two States: Resolving the Israel/Palestine Conflict” karya Prof. Benny Morris (New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2009).


Ketiga karya sejarawan Yahudi tersebut mewakili cara pandang yang berbeda, yang dua anti-Zionis, sedangkan yang satu pro-Zionis. Ketiganya dikenal sebagai “historian” yang sekarang sering dinamakan sebagai “mazhab sejarawan baru (New Historian)”. Ketiga profesor dengan pandangan yang berbeda bahkan berlawanan ini akan memberikan pandangan yang tidak sederhana tentang apa yang terjadi di kawasan Timur Tengah, khususnya terkait konflik Israel – Palestina. Ketiga profesor tersebut menggunakan sumber data dalam negeri mereka. Prof. Ilan Pappe dan Prof. Benny Morris keduanya terkenal menggunakan sumber utama Israel, termasuk sumber paramiliter dan tulisan langsung para “Bapak Bangsa” sebelum negara Israel itu berdiri. Namun, keduanya memiliki pandangan yang bertolak belakang dan kesimpulan yang berbeda pula, meskipun hal itu merujuk pada sumber data yang sama. Sementara itu, Prof. Noam Chomsky adalah seorang ahli bahasa dan politik, sekaligus pengamat Amerika yang sangat kritis menilai kebijakan luar negeri USA.


Fakta fase ke-2 terkait persiapan kedatangan Dajjal adalah penahbisan kota Yerusalem sebagai ibukota resmi negara Israel. Maulana Imran N. Hosein telah menyatakan betapa pentingnya kota suci Jerusalem sebagai tanda Akhir Zaman, dan beliau ternyata telah menulis buku ttng Jerusalem tersebut pada tahun 2002. Itu artinya, sebelum Presiden USA Donald Trump secara resmi mengumumkan Jerusalem pada tahun 2017 sebagai ibukota negara Israel, maka Maulana Imran N. Hosein sendiri sudah menyatakannya. Dalam bukunya “Jerusalem in the Quran: An Islamic View of the Destiny of Jerusalem” (San Fernando: Masjid Jamiah, 2002), hlm. 21 Maulana Imran N. Hosein mengatakan: “the book begins, appropriately with the mystery of Jerusalem, the town in the Quran. Perhaps the reason for a mysterious treatment of the subject is because Islam has taught that Jerusalem is destined to play a central crucial role in the Last Age.”


Sejarah telah membuktikan. Pada tgl. 6 Desember 2017, presiden USA Donald Trump telah menyatakan dan mengakui Yerusalem sebagai ibukota Israel, dan presiden Donald Trump sendiri telah mengumumkan akan segera memindahkan kedutaan USA dari kota Tel-Aviv ke kota Yerusalem. Pada tgl. 23 Februari 2018, Departemen Luar Negeri USA juga mengumumkan kembali bahwa Kedutaan Besar USA secara resmi akan dibuka di Yerusalem pada tgl. 14 Mei 2018, bertepatan dengan 70 tahun berdirinya negara Israel. Kini, Kedutaan Besar USA di Israel terletak di kawasan Arnona, Yerusalem Barat. Ini adalah fakta sejarah yang tidak bisa ditolak oleh siapapun. USA dan Saudi Arabia kini telah mengakui Yerusalam sebagai ibukota resmi negara Israel secara de jure. Bahkan, Saudi Arabia sangat begitu dekat dan akrab dengan Israel.


Pax-Judaica, fase ke-3


Fase ke-3 utk menyambut Dajjal akan segera terjadi. Dajjal akan segera bertahta di Singgasana Solomo, Raja Israel. Guru mulia Maulana Imran N. Hosein telah menulis 3 buah buku berkaitan dengan tema besar ini, yakni

  1. “Jerusalem in the Quran: An Islamic View of the Destiny of Jerusalem” (2002),
  2. “Dajjal the Quran and Awwal al-Zaman: the Beginning of History” (2017),
  3. “The Quran, Dajjal and the Jasad” (2019).

Pada fase ke-3 tersebut, kedatangan Dajjal akan ditandai dengan sebuah tanda besar, yakni adanya pembangunan Bait Suci ke-3 di atas reruntuhan Masjid Al-Aqsa. Inilah tanda kehadiran sebenarnya dari Al-Masih Dajjal.

Rashi dan Rambam telah menyebutkan mengenai adanya pembangunan Bait Suci ke-3 sebagai Beyt ha-Miqdas tatkala Mesias yang ditungu-tunggu itu datang, sebagaimana yang tercatat dalam Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Melachim 11:1,4 dan Talmud Yerushalmi, masechet Megillah 1:11.

Sirah Al-Masih Dajjal Bag.1: Keterkaitan Al-Masihu Dajjal dgn Yesus, Adam, Saudi, Israel & Yerusalem

Footnotes:

  1. Alkitab: Al-Kitab al-Muqaddas. Arab – Indonesia. ‘Arabiy – Indunisiy (Jakarta: Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia, 2003), hlm. 86
  2. Alkitab: Al-Kitab al-Muqaddas. Arab – Indonesia. ‘Arabiy – Indunisiy (Jakarta: Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia, 3003), hlm. 765.

Pseudo-Gematria Terkait Analisis תלדת Toldot (Generasi) Ishmael PART 2

Kajian gematria memang amat tidak sederhana bila dibandingkan dengan kajian peshat, meskipun keduanya saling terkait. Dalam tradisi Judaism – kata, frase atau pun ayat dalam teks Torah dapat dikaji berdasar רמז (remez), lit. “allusion” atau pun פשט (peshat), lit. “simple meaning of the verse.” Dalam hal kajian רמז (remez) ini, Rav Yaakov Baal HaTurim menyebut גימטריא (gematria) yang merujuk pada kajian nilai angka (numerical value) sebagai bagiannya [1].

Kajian gematria memang sangat rumit, terutama untuk mengungkap atau pun menguak pesan teks di balik redaksional teks itu sendiri. Kajian gematria, terutama terkait istilah תולדת (toldot) sangat penting dipahami oleh semua penganut agama rumpun Abrahamic, khususnya sebagai sebuah wacana terbuka, yang dapat dipelajari secara akademik demi menjembatani kesalahpahaman di antara penganut agama-agama. Istilah תולדת (toldot) merupakan istilah khas dalam bahasa Ibrani Biblikal, yang kemudian diterjemahkan oleh Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia (LAI) dengan istilah “silsilah” atau “riwayat.” Pengertian yang lebih harafiah dari istilah ini dalam bahasa Inggris disebut “the birth” atau dalam bahasa Indonesia disebut “kelahiran” atau “generasi.”

Ada sebuah artikel penting yang dimuat dalam sebuah situs resmi dari salah satu organisasi keagamaan tertentu di Indonesia, yang telah membahas topik ini. Pembahasan mengenai istilah תולדת ( toldot ), terutama mengenai תולדת (toldot) Ishmael ternyata telah dijabarkan secara detail dalam artikel tersebut. Menurut artikel itu, ada beberapa rahasia besar dalam penggunaan term תולדת (toldot) sebagaimana yang termaktub dalam kitab Tanach. Menurut analisis gematria yang mereka paparkan, rahasia תולדת (toldot) tersebut hanya dapat dilihat dalam huruf Ibraninya dan terletak dalam pengejaannya.

RAHASIA 1

Kata atau istilah ini pertama kali muncul di Sefer Bereshit (kitab Kejadian) 2:4.

אֵ֣לֶּה תוֹלְד֧וֹת הַשָּׁמַ֛יִם וְהָאָ֖רֶץ בְּהִבָּֽרְאָ֑ם בְּי֗וֹםעֲשׂ֛וֹת יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהִ֖ים אֶ֥רֶץ וְשָׁמָֽיִם׃

Inilah generasi/ silsilah langit dan bumi ketika mereka diciptakan, pada hari dimana saat Hashem menciptakan langit dan bumi (Sefer Bereshit 2:4)

Di dalam ayat ini, kata toldot dieja dengan dua huruf vav (תוֹלְד֧וֹת). Huruf vav (ו) ini adalah sebuah piktografi yang menggambarkan manusia, dengan nilai angka gematria 6. Huruf vav (ו) dalam aksara Ibrani memiliki nilai angka 6. Angka 6 adalah angka manusia atau angka yang “melambangkan” manusia.

Di dalam budaya Yahudi Eropa (Aschenazim) ada sebuah ungkapan yang berbunyi, “Dia adalah seorang Mensch.” Mensch adalah bahasa Yiddish yang berarti “manusia”, tetapi “manusia” yang dimaksud di sini bukanlah sembarang manusia; apalagi merujuk pada manusia yang korup dan jahat. Mensch adalah manusia yang sempurna secara moral dan rohani, persis seperti yang TUHAN ciptakan pada mulanya. Apabila seseorang dikatakan seorang Mensch, maka artinya adalah dia seseorang yang secara rohani dan moral merupakan orang yang terpuji.

Huruf vav (ו) yang tertulis ganda di dalam kata toldot (תולדות) di sini melambangkan manusia jenis Mensch seperti itu. Bukan sembarang manusia. Adanya dua huruf vav (ו) di dalam kata toldot hendak menunjukkan bahwa silsilah manusia hasil “produksi” bumi dan surga ini merupakan orang-orang Mensch, manusia yang sebenarnya. Mengenai istilah “produksi” bumi dan surga, dan apa arti ungkapan ini, silakan membaca artikel “Generasi Surga dan Bumi“). 

RAHASIA 2

Istilah תולדת (toldot) berikutnya dapat dipelajari dalam Sefer Bereshit (Kejadian) 10:1 

וְאֵ֙לֶּה֙ תּוֹלְדֹ֣ת בְּנֵי־נֹ֔חַ שֵׁ֖ם חָ֣ם וָיָ֑פֶת וַיִּוָּלְד֥וּ לָהֶ֛ם בָּנִ֖ים אַחַ֥ר הַמַּבּֽוּל׃

Inilah generasi/ silsilah anak-anak Nuh – Shem, Ham, dan Yafet dan anak-anak yang dilahirkan bagi mereka setelah air bah. (Bereshit 10:1)

Kata toldot yang digunakan disini, kehilangan satu huruf vav (ו) pada suku kata ke-2, dan tertulis (תּוֹלְדֹ֣ת) sehingga hanya ada satu huruf vav (ו) pada suku kata pertama, atau pada awal kata. Hilangnya satu huruf vav (ו) menyatakan kepada kita bahwa generasi manusia yang disebut sesudah ini ternyata tidak semuanya adalah seorang Mensch. Salah satu di antara mereka menjadi manusia yang korup atau jahat. Kita mengetahui bahwa satu di antara anak-anak Nuh, yaitu Ham, rusak kelakuannya, jahat dan menyebabkan ayahnya mengutuk anak Ham. 

Kita dapat melihat ejaan yang sama di Sefer Bereshit 5:1 ketika Taurat menyebutkan silsilah/generasi Adam. Kita tahu bagaimana Kain berlaku jahat dan tidak berlaku sepantasnya sebagai seorang Mensch. Demikian juga ejaan istilah תולדת (toldot) tersebut dapat ditemukan di Sefer Bereshit 11:10 yang merujuk pada silsilah/generasi Shem, ternyata tidak semua anak-anak Shem menjadi Mensch) Begitu juga pada Sefer Bereshit 11:27 ditemukan silsilah/generasi Terah, ternyata tidak semua anak-anak Terah menjadi Mensch. Begitu juga pada Sefer Bereshit 25:19 juga tercantum silsilah Ishak, dua anak kembar, dan yang satu menjadi jahat. Bahkan, pada Sefer Bereshit 37:2 juga terdapat silsilah/ generasi Yakub, dan ternyata tidak semua keturunan Yakub menjadi seorang Mensch. 

RAHASIA 3

Ejaan yang berbeda lagi juga muncul dalam Sefer Bereshit 25:12 yang merujuk pada silsilah/generasi Ishmael.

וְאֵ֛לֶּה תֹּלְדֹ֥ת יִשְׁמָעֵ֖אל בֶּן־אַבְרָהָ֑ם אֲשֶׁ֨ר יָלְדָ֜ה הָגָ֧ר הַמִּצְרִ֛ית שִׁפְחַ֥ת שָׂרָ֖ה לְאַבְרָהָֽם׃

Inilah generasi/ silsilah Ishmael, anak Abraham yang dikandung oleh Hagar orang Mesir itu, pelayan Sarah, bagi Abraham. 
(Sefer Bereshit 25:12)

Dalam ejaan ini, bahkan tidak ada satu pun huruf vav (ו) yang dipakai dalam penulisan term toldot ini, yakni tertulis (תֹּלְדֹ֥ת). Hal ini hendak menunjukkan bahwa hampir mustahil untuk mencari seorang Mensch dari antara keturunan Ishmael. Hal ini semakin dipertegas dengan nubuat TUHAN kepada Hagar, yang menyatakan bagaimana sifat keturunan Ishmael ini nantinya.

וְה֤וּא יִהְיֶה֙ פֶּ֣רֶא אָדָ֔ם יָד֣וֹ בַכֹּ֔ל וְיַ֥ד כֹּ֖ל בּ֑וֹ

“Dia akan menjadi seperti pere adam – tangannya akan melawan tangan semua orang ….”

*****************

SANGGAHAN 1

Generasi ideal yang seluruh keturunannya berkarakter “mensch”, yang ditulis dengan menggunakan huruf vav (ו) ganda, sebagaimana yang tercatat dalam kitab Tanach ternyata faktanya tidak pernah ada. Idealnya, generasi yang seluruhnya berkarakter “mensch”, yakni manusia yang bermoral dan rohaninya sempurna diharapkan pernah ada. Namun, realitasnya keseluruhan silsilah/ generasi yang ideal ini ternyata tidak pernah ditemukan dalam pentas sejarah umat manusia. Bahkan, seluruh keturunan dari generasi/silsilah manusia yang ideal ini tidak pernah tercatat dalam kitab suci, sebagaimana kesaksian teks yang termaktub dalam kitab suci Tanach dan Quran. Tidak adanya kepaduan antara “das sein” dengan “das solen”; atau pun “das solen” yang faktanya tidak sama atau tidak berbanding lurus dengan “das sein”, maka hal ini meniscayakan sebuah kemustahilan. Artinya, dalam seluruh generasi tsb, seluruh manusia (keturunan) yang dilahirkan sebagai mensch, secara nalar – tipe generasi seperti ini tdk mungkin pernah ada. Analisis gematria berdasar pada penggunaan term toldot dengan ejaan huruf vav ganda – תולדות (toldot) yang merujuk pada generasi/silsilah ideal sebagai “mensch” justru membuktikan sebaliknya. Dengan demikian, pernyataan tersebut terbantahkan dengan munculnya term toldot – תולדות – dalam teks kitab suci yang memiliki double huruf vav (ו) tetapi realitasnya dalam silsilah tersebut terdapat generasi yang jahat. Fakta ini dapat dijumpai pada תולדות (toldot) atau generasi Perez, dan ternyata di antara keturunan/generasi Perez justru ada di antara mereka yang berlaku jahat di hadapan Hashem. 

וְאֵ֙לֶּה֙ תּוֹלְד֣וֹת פָּ֔רֶץ פֶּ֖רֶץ הוֹלִ֥יד אֶת־חֶצְרֽוֹן׃

” This is the line of Perez: Perez begot Hezron …. “
(Ruth : 4:18-22). 

Ini berarti, meskipun teksnya menggunakan term toldot dengan double huruf vav, תולדות – ternyata muncul juga generasi yang korup/ berlaku jahat (rasha’), lit. “wicked person”, dan tidak sepantasnya disebut sebagai seorang “mensch”, misalnya Raja Daud yang berzina dengan Batsyeba, istri Uria (2 Samuel 11: 1-27; 2 Samuel 12:1-25). Begitu juga Raja Salomo amat jahat di mata Hashem, dan menyembah ilah-ilah lain (1 Raja 11:5-8). Begitu juga Raja Manasye (2 Raja 21:1-18), Raja Amon (2 Raja 21: 19-26), Raja Yoahas (2 Raja 23: 31-35); ketiga orang ini adalah keturunan Perez yang jahat di mata Hashem. Jadi, meskipun nasab mereka mewarisi darah dari Perez, tetapi mereka termasuk generasi “untermensch” atau rasha’ (manusia rendah). Kemudian, ada satu lagi keturunan Perez yang berkarakter jahat (rasha’) di hadapan Hashem. Bahkan, sudah dikutuk oleh Hashem sendiri, yakni Raja Jechoniah alias Yoyakhin (Yeremia 22:30). 

Jika dikaitkan dengan silsilah Yesus menurut St. Matius, ini artinya bahwa tak ada seorang pun dari antara keturunan Jechoniah yang akan menjadi Messiah. Hal ini berarti mendiskualifikasi nama Yesus sebagai seorang Messiah. Maksudnya adalah Messiah memang harus berasal dari keturunan Daud, tetapi bukan dari nasab Jechoniah. 

St. Matius membiarkan nama Jechoniah dalam daftar silsilah Yesus, kemungkinan besar karena Raja Jechoniah alias Yoyakhin, ternyata namanya memang mirip dengan nama ayahnya, yakni Raja Yoyàkim. 

ו וַיִּשְׁכַּב יְהוֹיָקִים, עִם-jlאֲבֹתָיו; וַיִּמְלֹךְ יְהוֹיָכִין בְּנוֹ, תַּחְתָּיו.

“Kemudian Yoyakim mendapat perhentian bersama-sama dengan nenek moyangnya, maka Yoyakhin, anaknya, menjadi raja menggantikan dia.” (2 Raja 24:6)

Begitu tahu nama Jechoniah dikutuk oleh Hashem, St. Matius buru-buru menghilangkan nama Jechoniah. Namun, St. Matius ternyata lupa atau tidak bisa membedakan antara nama Yoyakim dan nama Yoyakhin; maka yang dihilangkan justru nama Yoyakim, yang sebenarnya itu adalah nama sang ayah dari Yoyakhin. Oleh sebab itulah, dengan menghilangkan nama Yoyakim, justru berakibat fatal pada pernyataan St. Matius sendiri dalam daftar silsilah Yesus (Matius 1:17), yang seharusnya jumlah generasi yang dipikirkannya ada 42 orang, ternyata hanya tercatat 41 orang. Awalnya, St. Matius hendak membuat gematria yang berpola 3 sets of fourteen (3 x 14 = 42) sesuai gematria nama דוד (David). Namun, data sejarah yang termaktub dalam kitab Tawarikh tersebut lebih dari 42 generasi, maka St. Matius dengan buru-buru memangkas 3 generasi dari Raja Daud dengan cara membuang 3 nama penting dalam silsilah tersebut. Hal ini tentu saja bertujuan agar jumlah silsilah tidak melebihi hitungan gematria 42, sebagaimana yang dipikirkannya. Namun, kesalahan St. Matius tetap berlanjut, dia terburu-buru membuang nama Jechoniah yang dikutuk Hashem, tetapi justru dia keliru – yang dibuang malah sebaliknya, yakni nama ayah dari Raja Jechoniah, yang bernama Raja Yoyakim, tanpa memikirkan akibatnya. Jadi, dengan membuang nama Raja Yoyakim, maka jumlah generasi yang dicatatnya hanya berjumlah 41 orang, bukan 42 orang. Keteledoran catatan St. Matius ini menjadi ahistoris dan tidak sesuai dengan gematria yang ditetapkannya sendiri, yakni dengan merujuk pada nama דוד (David) yang terdiri atas 3 huruf Ibrani yang numeriknya bernilai 14, sehingga total generasi seharusnya berjumlah 42 orang. 

Jadi, kasus misidentifikasi St. Matius terhadap tokoh Raja Yoyakim dan Raja Yoyakhin ini sangat menarik; meskipun namanya mirip dengan nama ayahnya, bukan berarti karakternya mirip dengan karakter ayahnya. Itulah sebabnya, Hashem menjatuhkan kutukan kepada Raja Yoyakhin, putra Raja Yoyakim, yang juga tertulis dalam nas kitab suci Tanach.

“Beginilah firman TUHAN: “Catatlah orang ini sebagai orang yang tak punya anak, sebagai laki-laki yang tidak pernah berhasil dalam hidupnya; sebab seorangpun dari keturunannya tidak akan berhasil duduk di atas takhta Daud dan memerintah kembali di Yehuda.” (Yeremia 22:30).

SANGGAHAN 2

Manusia yang berkarakter “mensch” untuk generasi jenis kedua ini, merupakan hal yg wajar, dan bisa diterima secara nalar. Ada tipe manusia yang disebut “ubermensch” (manusia unggul) atau tzadiq (righteous person) dan ada juga tipe manusia yang disebut “untermensch” (manusia rendah) atau rasha’ (wicked person). Dalam Sefer Bereshit 25:19 terkait generasi/silsilah Isaac, ternyata tertulis term toldot dengan ejaan kehilangan satu huruf vav, yakni tertulis תולדת (toldot), dan Esau sendiri sebenarnya dianggap sebagai keturunan Isaac yang berlaku jahat, yakni berkarakter rasha’ (wicked person), atau Esau dapat juga disebut sebagai “untermensch” (manusia rendah).

Namun, meskipun Edom (Esau) yang dicitrakan buruk dan jahat, ternyata pada תלדות (toldot) yakni silsilah generasi keturunannya, ditulis dengan menggunakan 1 huruf vav (ו); hal ini mengindikasikan bahwa di antara keturunan Esau akan ada generasi yang baik (ubermensch) dan ada pula generasi yang buruk (untermensch). Bahkan, pada generasi/ keturunan Edom, ada pula di antara mereka yang menjadi nabi-nabi, di antaranya Ayub, Elihu, Eliphaz, Bildad dan Zophar. Ini menjadi bukti bahwa di antara keturunan Esau ada generasi yang unggul, atau “ubermensch” atau “tzadiqim” (righteous persons). 

Pola silsilah/ generasi Esau menggunakan ejaan תלדות (toldot) dengan disertai 1 huruf vav (ו) sebagaimana pola silsilah/ generasi Yakub juga menggunakan ejaan תלדות (toldot) dengan disertai 1 huruf vav (ו). 

וְאֵ֛לֶּה תֹּלְד֥וֹת עֵשָׂ֖ו ה֥וּא אֱדֽוֹם׃

This is the line of Esau — that is, Edom.
(Sefer Bereshit 36:1).

אלה תלדות יעקב 

This is the line of Jacob (Sefer Bereshit 37:2)

Pola ejaan penulisan תלדות (toldot) pada generasi Esau dan Yakub mengindikasikan bahwa di antara keturunan mereka masing-masing akan muncul keturunan yang bertipe ubermensch (manusia unggul), dan ada juga dari antara keturunan mereka yang bertipe untermensch (manusia rendah) yang berlaku jahat. 

Siapakah Edom? Edom adalah nama lain dari Esau, dan generasi Esau tentu bukanlah generasi Yakub, karena keduanya merujuk pada 2 person yang berbeda. Namun, di antara keturunan Yakub dan keturunan Esau – akan muncul manusia-manusia yang menjadi nabi-nabi, dan di antara keturunan Yakub dan keturunan Esau – juga muncul manusia-manusia yang berkarakter jahat, untermensch (manusia rendah), atau pun rasha’ (wicked person). Itulah sebabnya term yang digunakan dalam toldot Yakub dan toldot Esau tersebut sepadan, yakni ejaannya hanya menggunakan 1 huruf vav (ו) saja, yakni תלדות. 

Raymond P. Scheindlin, a Professor of Medieval Hebrew Literature at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America explained that Job was a non-Israelite, probably as an Edomite, since Utz, Job’s homeland is connected elsewhere in the Bible with Edom, the desert territory to the Southeast of the Dead Sea; so also his friends, Zophar, Eliphaz Elihu and Bildad were non-Israelites, [2]

Begitu juga Rashi, dalam bukunya Perush ‘al ha-Torah, khususnya Sefer Devarim (kitab Ulangan) 33:2, ternyata dalam penjelasannya sang Rabbi berkata demikian: 

וזרח משעיר למו שפתח לבני עשו שיקבלו את התורה ולא רצו ספרי:
הופיע להם מהר פארן שהלך שם ופתח לבני ישמעאל שיקבלוה ולא רצו ספרי:
ואתה לישראל

Ve zarach mis-Seir lamo sheffatach le b’nei Esau sheyyeqabelu et hat-Torah ve lo ratzu sifrei. Hofi’a lahem saya Har Paran, shehalach sham u-fatach li b’nei Yishmael sheyyeqabbeluha ve lo ratzu sifrei. Ve atah le Yisrael.

("dan Dia Yang Maha Kudus muncul dari Seir kepada mereka. Maksudnya, Dia mempersembahkan kitab Torah kepada keturunan Esau penduduk Seir, bahwa mereka harus menerima Taurat, tetapi mereka tidak ingin melakukan isi kitab suci tersebut. Dia Yang maha Kudus bersinar kepada mereka dari gunung Paran. Maksudnya, Dia kemudian pergi ke sana dan mempersembahkan kitab Torah kepada keturunan Ismael, dan mereka harus menerimanya, tetapi ternyata mereka tidak berkeinginan untuk melakukannya kitab suci tersebut. Dan akhirnya, Dia Yang Maha Kudus datang kepada Israel ").

Komentar yang dikutip oleh Rashi dari teks Midrash ini penting untuk dipahami bahwa sejak semula Hashem sangat peduli kepada keturunan Esau. Namun, ada beberapa pertanyaan kritis berkaitan dengan kepeduliaan Hashem terhadap keturunan Esau tersebut. Pertama, mengapa sejak semula Hashem sangat peduli terhadap keturunan Esau (b’nei Esau) terutama berkaitan dengan anugerah pewahyuan Torah? Kedua, apakah hal ini ada kaitannya dengan rahasia penulisan תלדות (toldot) dengan ejaan 1 huruf vav (ו) yang meniscayakan adanya keturunan Esau, yakni בני עשו (b’nei Esau) yang nantinya akan menjadi nabi-nabi atau generasi keturunan Esau yang memiliki karakter ubermensch (manusia unggul)? Ketiga, mengapa sejak semula Hashem tidak peduli terhadap keturununan Yakub terkait anugerah pewahyuan kitab Torah dan justru yang dipedulikan lebih awal oleh Hashem adalah keturunan Esau? Keempat, teks Midrash tersebut menjadi bukti kuat, sebagaimana Hashem peduli terhadap keturunan Yakub, maka Hashem juga peduli terhadap b’nei Esau atau keturunan Esau. Kelima, bukankah Esau (Edom) dianggap sebagai manusia yang berkarakter jahat di mata Hashem tetapi mengapa keturunan/generasi Esau (b’nei Esau) dipedulikan oleh Hashem? Keenam, apakah kepeduliaan Hashem terhadap keturunan Esau (b’nei Esau) sebagaimana yang tercatat dalam teks Midrash itu mengisyaratkan adanya pewahyuan lain selain Torah kepada b’nei Esau?

Dalam karya monumental berbahasa Judeo-Arabic, RAMBAM pernah menulis surat kepada kaum Yahudi diaspora di Yaman tentang asal-usul identitas Ayub.

לאן איוב וצופר ובלדד ואליפז ואליהוא כלהם ענדנא אנביא ואן כאנו ליס מן ישראל (אגרת תימן)

Lianna Ayyub wa Shofar wa Bildad wa Elifaz wa Elihu kulluhum ‘indana Anbiya’ wa kanu laysa min Yisroil.

“Sesungguhnya Ayub, Zofar, Bildad, Elifaz, dan Elihu, mereka semuanya adalah Nabi-nabi, meskipun nasab mereka bukan keturunan Israel” (Iggeret Teyman)  [3]

Penjelasan RAMBAM dalam suratnya kepada orang-orang Yaman (Iggeret Teyman), dia berkata: “Ayub dan teman-temannya Tzofer, Bildad, Elifaz dan Elihu – mereka semua nabi-nabi yang telah menerima misi kenabian meskipun mereka nasabnya bukan keturunan Yahudi.” Apakah menurut RAMBAM, semua nabi-nabi yang disebut dalam Iggeret ha-Teyman, yakni Ayub, Tzofer, Bildad, Elifaz dan Elihu, mereka adalah para nabi dari keturunan Ham atau keturunan Shem? Apakah mereka keturunan Ishmael? Apakah mereka keturunan Esau? Penjelasan RAMBAM ini diperkuat dengan pernyataan Raymond P. Scheindlin, seorang Profesor Sastra Ibrani Abad Pertengahan di Seminari Teologi Yahudi Amerika juga menjelaskan bahwa Ayub adalah seorang non-Israel, mungkin sebagai orang Edom, karena Utz, tanah kelahiran Ayub terkait dengan tempat lain, yang dalam Alkitab disebut dengan wilayah Edom, yakni wilayah gurun yang terletak di arah tenggara kawasan Laut Mati; begitu juga teman-temannya, Zophar, Eliphaz Elihu dan Bildad adalah orang-orang non-Israel,  [4]

Dengan demikian, teks Torah dan teks Midrash telah membuktikan bahwa Hashem telah mengutus Musa sebagai seorang nabi dari antara keturunan Israel, dan Hashem juga mengutus Ayub sebagai seorang nabi dari antara keturunan Esau. 

SANGGAHAN 3

Menurut Sefer Bereshit 25:12 penulisan toldot yang merujuk pada generasi/silsilah Ishmael memang ejaan penulisannya tanpa menggunakan 1 pun huruf vav (ו), yakni tertulis תלדת (toldot). Fakta tekstual ejaan penulisan תלדת (toldot) seperti ini juga muncul terkait silsilah/ generasi keturunan Lewi. 

Berikut generasi menurut keturunan Lewi.

וְאֵ֨לֶּה שְׁמ֤וֹת בְּנֵֽי־לֵוִי֙ לְתֹ֣לְדֹתָ֔ם גֵּרְשׁ֕וֹן וּקְהָ֖ת וּמְרָרִ֑י וּשְׁנֵי֙ חַיֵּ֣י לֵוִ֔י שֶׁ֧בַע וּשְׁלֹשִׁ֛ים וּמְאַ֖ת שָׁנָֽה׃

These are the names of Levi’s sons by their lineage: Gershon, Kohath, and Merari; and the span of Levi’s life was 137 years.( Exodus 6:16).

וּבְנֵ֥י מְרָרִ֖י מַחְלִ֣י וּמוּשִׁ֑י אֵ֛לֶּה מִשְׁפְּחֹ֥ת הַלֵּוִ֖י לְתֹלְדֹתָֽם׃

The sons of Merari: Mahli and Mushi. These are the families of the Levites by their lineage.
(Exodus 6:19).

Dalam penulisan generasi/ keturunan Ishmael memang menggunakan ejaan toldot ( תלדת) tanpa ada satu pun huruf vav (ו). Namun, apakah hal ini membuktikan bahwa generasi/ keturunan Ishmael semuanya korup dan jahat atau “untermensch”? Dalam penulisan generasi/ keturunan Lewi juga menggunakan ejaan toldot (תלדת) tanpa ada satu pun huruf vav (ו). Apakah itu juga berarti bahwa generasi/keturunan Lewi yang mayoritas adalah generasi Kohen ha-Gadol dapat disebut bahwa mereka semua sebagai generasi yang korup dan jahat atau manusia bertipe “untermensch” (manusia rendah), hanya berdasar pada alasan sederhana, yakni karena dalam penulisan toldot-nya tidak dijumpai satu pun huruf vav (ו)? Fakta yang lebih mengejutkan lagi berdasarkan Tanach (1 Tawarikh 1:29), ternyata penulisan “toldot” Ishmael juga berpola ejaan תלדות (toldot), yakni dengan menggunakan 1 huruf vav (ו). Hal ini justru membuktikan bahwa di antara keturunan/ generasi Ishmael akan muncul tipe generasi ubermensch (manusia unggul) dan sekaligus juga akan muncul tipe generasi untermensch (manusa rendah), sebagaimana generasi Yakub, yang ejaan penulisan toldot-nya dengan menggunakan 1 huruf vav (ו) saja, yakni תלדות (toldot). 

אלה תלדות יעקב 

This is the line of Jacob (Sefer Bereshit 37:2). 

Silakan Anda secara jujur membandingkan pola ejaan penulisan תלדות יעקב (toldot Yakub) dalam teks Sefer Bereshit 37:2 dengan pola ejaan penulisan תלדותם בני ישמעאל (toldotem b’nei Yishmael) sebagaimana nas yang termaktub dalam Tanach (1 Tawarikh 1: 29). 

אֵ֖לֶּה תֹּלְדוֹתָ֑ם בְּכ֤וֹר יִשְׁמָעֵאל֙ נְבָי֔וֹת וְקֵדָ֥ר וְאַדְבְּאֵ֖ל וּמִבְשָֽׂם׃

This is their line: The first-born of Ishmael, Nebaioth; and Kedar, Abdeel, Mibsam.” (1 Tawarikh 1:29).

Para pembaca seharusnya juga bernalar secara kritis, terutama berkaitan dengan pola perbedaan ejaan penulisan “toldot” dalam teks Sefer Bereshit 25:12 menurut versi Masoretic Torah dan versi Samaritan Torah. Ejaan yang berbeda dalam kedua versi Torah tersebut, terkait teks Sefer Bereshit 25:12, yakni mengenai silsilah/ generasi Ishmael, memang sangat penting dikaji dalam hal ortografinya.

Menurut versi Masoretic Torah, ortografi penulisan kata תלדת (toldot), ternyata tidak disertai dengan penggunaan huruf vav (ו). Sebaliknya, menurut versi Samaritan Torah, ortografi penulisan kata תולדת (toldot) justru disertai dengan penggunaan huruf vav (ו). Demikianlah corak ortografis kedua versi Torah tersebut dapat dikaji oleh para pembaca.

1. Masoretic Torah version, tanpa menggunakan huruf vav.  [5]

וְאֵ֛לֶּה תֹּלְדֹ֥ת יִשְׁמָעֵ֖אל בֶּן־אַבְרָהָ֑ם אֲשֶׁ֨ר יָלְדָ֜ה הָגָ֧ר הַמִּצְרִ֛ית שִׁפְחַ֥ת שָׂרָ֖ה לְאַבְרָהָֽם׃

2. Samaritan Torah version, dengan menggunakan huruf vav. 

וְאֵ֛לֶּה תֹּולְדֹ֥ת יִשְׁמָעֵ֖אל בֶּן־אַבְרָהָ֑ם אֲשֶׁ֨ר יָלְדָ֜ה הָגָ֧ר הַמִּצְרִ֛ית שִׁפְחַ֥ת שָׂרָ֖ה לְאַבְרָהָֽם׃

“Inilah generasi/ silsilah Ishmael anak Abraham yang dikandung oleh Hagar orang Mesir itu, pelayan Sarah, bagi Abraham. (Sefer Bereshit 25:12),

Dalam ejaan versi teks Masoret (Masoretic Torah), memang tidak ada satu pun huruf vav (ו) yang digunakan, “toldot” (תֹּלְדֹ֥ת). Sebaliknya, ejaan versi teks Samaria (Samaritan Torah) justru huruf vav (ו) digunakan dalam penulisan ortigrafisnya, “toldot” (תולדת). Dengan membandingkan kedua pola ejaan/ ortografis menurut kedua versi Torah tersebut, maka analisis terhadap nas Sefer Bereshit 25:12 justru tidak relevan.

Rashi telah menjelaskan bahwa Ishmael adalah “orang benar”, yang berkenan di hadapan Hashem. Ishmael bukanlah seseorang yang berkarakter korup atau pun jahat, yang dalam bahasa Jerman disebut “untermensch” (manusia rendah), sebagaimana yang dituduhkan oleh sebagian orang. Ishmael adalah manusia bertipe “ubermensch” atau “the righteous man.” Sefer Bereshit 25:17

ואלה שני היי ישמעאל מאת שנה ושלשים שנה ושבע שנים ויגוע וימת ויאסף אל עמיו : 

Ve elleh shenei chayye Yishma’el meat shanah u-sheloshim shanah ve sheva’ shanim vay-yigva’ vay-yamat vay-yeasef el ‘ammaiv (Sefer Bereshit 25:17).

“These were the years of Ishmael’s life: a hundred years and thirty years and seven years, and he expired and he died, and was brought in to his people.”

Berdasarkan pada nas ayat Tanach tersebut, Rashi dalam “Parashas Chayei Sarah, Sefer Bereshit 24:17 beliau menjelaskan bahwa frase Ibrani yang berbunyi: vay-yigva’ (ויגוע), merujuk kepada Ishmael sebagai orang saleh (the righteous), ישמעאל הצדיק (Yishma’el ha-Tzadiq), lit. “Ishmael the Righteous”, karena Ishmael sendiri sebagai salah satu dari antara kumpulan orang-orang saleh, yakni Tzadiqim (צדיקים). Rashi berkata: ויגוע (vay-yigva’) lit. “and he expired” – lo ne’emrah gevi’ah elle be-tzadiqim (לא נאמרה גויעה אלא בצדיקים), lit. “expiring is not stated in Scripture except regarding the righteous.  [6]

Talmud Bavli, Baba Bathra 75b juga menjelaskan tentang kemuliaan orang saleh, הצדיק (ha-tzadiq) yang diciptakan oleh Hashem berdasar pada nama suci-Nya: “Three things were created on the basis of the name of the Holy One, צדיקים (tzadiqim), lit. “the Righteous”, המשיח (ha-Moshiach), lit. “the Messiah”, וירושלים (ve Yerushalayim), lit. “and Jerusalem (Talmud Bavli, masechet Baba Bathra 75b). ישמעאל (Yishmael) adalah orang saleh, seorang “ubermensch”, sebagaimana Messiah, keduanya diciptakan berdasar pada kemuliaan nama suci-Nya. Itulah sebabnya nama Ishmael disebut dengan namanya sebelum dia diciptakan. 

ששה נקראו בשמותן עד שלא נולדו. ואלו הן יצחק, וישמעאל, ומשה רבנו, ושלמה, ויאשיהו, ושמו של משיח

Shishshah niqreu bi-shemotan ‘ad shello noladu, ve ellu hen, Yitzhaq, ve Yishma’el, u-Moshe Rabbenu, u-Shlomoh, ve Yoshiyyahu, u-shemo shel ha-Moshiach

Six peoples were called by their names before they were begotten, and they are Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Josiah, and the name of King Messiah. [7]

Tanach juga mencatat generasi/ keturunan Ishmael yang bertipe manusia yang disebut “ubermensch” di antaranya: Yeter orang Ishmael (1 Tawarikh 2:17). Yeter memperanakkan Amasa, panglima tentara Israel dan keponakan Raja Daud. Hal itu berarti bahwa seorang dari keturunan Ishmael telah menikah dengan salah seorang putri keluarga Daud. Hal itu didukung oleh kasus Obil orang Ishmael, yang dipercaya oleh Raja Daud dan mengawasi unta-unta milik Raja Daud (1 Tawarikh 27:30-33).

Jadi pada intinya analisis thd frase תולדות -תלדות – תלדת adalah analisis yang tidak tepat dan terlalu gegabah. Marilah kita berpikir kritis dan tidak mengedepankan prasangka yang chauvinistic.

Footnotes:

  1. See Rabbi Nosson Scherman. Baal HaTurim Chumash. Bereishis/ Genesis (Brooklyn, New York: Mesorah Publications, Ltd., 2013), p. xvi. 
  2. See Raymon P. Scheindlin. “The Book of Job. Translation, Introduction and Notes (New York – London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1998), pp. 11-13.
  3. Lihat karya Abraham S. Halkin. Moses Maimonides’ Epistle to Yemen. The Arabic Original and The Three Hebrew Versions. Edited from Manuscripts with Introduction and Notes (New York: American Academy for Jewish Research, 1953), hlm. 50-52
  4. Lihat Raymon P. Scheindlin. “The Book of Job. Translation, Introduction and Notes (New York – London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1998), hlm. 11-13.
  5. See Mark Shoulson. The Torah: Jewish and Samaritan Versions Compared (New Jersey, USA: Evertype, 2008), p.63. 
  6. See Rabbi Yisrael Isser Zvi Herczeg. Phirush Rashi. Bereishis/Genesis. The Torah with Rashi’s Commentary, Translated, Annotated and Ellucidated (Brooklyn, New York: Mesorah Publications, Ltd., 1999), p.269.
  7. See Rav Eliezer. Pirke de Rav Eliezer ‘im be-Ur hab-Bayit hag-Gadol (Yerushalayim: Eshkol, 1965), p. 108

HAGAR THE PRINCESS

The gematria of the Hebrew name ישמעאל (Yishmael) is 451; it is equal to that of both Hebrew names אברם (Abram), 243 dan הגר (Hagar) 208. Thus, the gematria of ישמעאל (Yishmael) is 451, the same as that of אברם והגר (Abram ve Hagar), 451. Abraham is the father of Ishmael, Hagar is the mother of Ishmael. Hagar bore Ishmael for Abraham. Meanwhile, the gematria of the Hebrew name הגר (Hagar) is 208, the same as that of the title of Abram as אב המון (av hamon), 208; the phrase literally means “a father of a multitude” see Sefer Bereshit 17:4-5. Amazingly, the Arabic name اسمعيل (Isma’il) appears 12 times in the Holy Quran. It means that the Quran also confirms the gematria of Ishmael in the Torah. In the Sefer Bereshit (Genesis) 17:20, LORD said to Abraham: 

ולישמעאל שמעתיך הנה אתו במאד מאד שנים עשר נשיאם יולד ונתתיו לגוי גדול: 
u-le Yishma'el shema'ticha hinneh berachti oto ve hifreiti oto ve hirbeiti oto be-meod meod sheneim 'ashar nesi'im yolid le goy gadol. 
"But regarding Ishmael I have heard you, I have blessed him, made him fruitful and will increase him most exceedingly; he will beget twelve princes and I will make him into a great nation." 

Interestingly, based on the verse, three keywords textually appear in one sentence: ישמעאל (Yishmael), במאד מאד (be-meod meod), and שנים עשר (sheneim ‘ashar), and the readers have to understand it most attentively. The gematria of ישמעאל (Yishmael) is 451, and the gematria of במאד מאד (be-meod meod) is 92. Thus, the gematria of ישמעאל (451), lit. “Yishmael” and the gematria of במאד מאד (92), lit. “most exceedingly” totally is 543 (5 + 4 + 3 = 12), the same as that of the term שנים עשר (sheneim ‘ashar), lit. “twelve.” Also, the gematria of ישמעאל (Yishmael) is 451, and the gematria of מחמד (Muhammad), lit. “most preciously” is 92, thus both names have a value 543 (5 + 4 + 3 = 12), the same of that of the term שנים עשר (sheneim ‘ashar), lit. “twelve.” Indeed, the Torah has a link with the Quran in the light of gematria about Ishmael.

The first, the name of ישמעאל (Yishmael) directly refers to the phrase במאד מאד (be-meod meod), lit. “most exceedingly” which has a relation to the phrase שנים עשר נשיאם (sheneim ‘ashar nesi’im), lit. “the twelve princes.” The second, the name of ישמעאל (Yishmael) indirectly refers to the name מחמד (Muhammad), lit. “most preciously” which has a relation to the phrase שנים עשר נשיאם (sheneim ‘ashar nesi’im), lit. “the twelve princes.”

Based on the Sefer Bereshit 17:20, the gematria of the phrase במאד מאד (be-meod meod), lit. “most exceedingly” is 92, the same as that of the next phrase לגוי גדול (le goy gadol), 92; and this phrase literally means “to be a great nation.” Amazingly, both phrases directly refer to the same, the offspring of ישמעאל (Yishmael). The gematria of ישמעאל – במאד מאד (Yishmael – be meod meod), is 543, it is equal to that of ישמעאל – לגוי גדול (Yishmael – le goy gadol); and both phrases have a relation to the phrase שנים עשר נשיאם (sheneim ‘ashar nesi’im), lit. “the twelve princes.” Similarly, the gematria of the phrase לגוי גדול (le goy gadol) is 92; and this phrase literally means “to be a great nation.”

Bencana Besar Zaman Nabi NUH akn terulang lagi, Hanya Umat Mukmin yg mewarisi Bumi ke depan

Terkait dengan banyaknya bencana2 dasyat yg tidak hanya terjadi di indonesia, tapi hampir di setiap sudut bumi (tapi orang indonesia hanya taunya kejadian di indonesia saja) secara bertubi-tubi, hal ini sebagai isyarat jika kejadian banjir besar Zaman Nuh (yang menyapu habis mayoritas manusia zaman itu dan hanya menyelamatkan orang2 tertentu yg beriman saja) akan terulang lagi di suatu hari nanti mungkin dalam bentuk yg lain, Banjir besar yg sifatnya global saat itu adalah sebagai ketentuan Allah untuk memisahkan antara kaum mukmin dengan kaum durjana dan munafik,,, dan Allah hanya menyelamatkan kaum Mukmin di zaman Nuh tersebut sebagai pewaris Bumi untuk selanjutnya,,, Dan sesuai dengan kalimat Allah dalam Quran (QS An-Nur 55 & QS.Al-Anbiya 105-106), Allah akan mewarisi bumi periode selanjutnya hanya kepada kaum yg beriman saja (Mukmin) dengan memisahkan kaum yg mukmin dengan yang kafir dan munafik yang akan dibinasakan oleh Allah,,, dan hal itu terekam dalam kitab suci tidak hanya Quran saja tetapi juga terdapat dalam kitab Yahudi yaitu Kitab Tehilim (Kitab Mazmur berbahasa Ibrani) Pasal 37 ayat 29:. כטצַדִּיקִ֥ים יִֽירְשׁוּ־אָ֑רֶץ וְיִשְׁכְּנ֖וּ לָעַ֣ד עָלֶֽיהָ: “Cadikim Yisreshu’eretz wiyeskhenu La’at aleiha, The righteous shall inherit the land and dwell forever in it” (Kaum yg beriman akan mewarisi bumi dan tinggal selamanya) dan Kitab Tri Vedha umat Hindu yang lebih dahulu muncul ribuan tahun sebelum Quran,,,

Dan setiap dari semua bencana dan kejadian besar zaman dahulu tersebut Allah selalu menghadirkan cinderamata berupa kenang2an atau barang bukti yang ditinggalkan oleh Allah untuk bisa diketemukan oleh manusia berkutnya, untuk dipelajari dan diambil hikmahnya serta untuk menjadikan pelajaran bagi umat manusia selanjutnya bahwa mereka telah mengingkari tanda2 kekuasaan Allah, karena Allah telah berjanji jika seluruh negeri tersebut beriman pada Quran sbg kitab Allah maka negeri tersebut akan diberkahi dalam segenap penjuru bumi (QS.Al-A’Raaf 96),,, namun sebaliknya jika penduduk negeri tersebut ingkar terhadap ayat2 Allah dalam Quran maka tunggulah azab dari Allah, dan itupun masih banyak manusia (kafir dan munafik) yg malah menantang agar Allah segera menurunkan azab tersebut seperti yang terjadi saat ini di indonesia, karena jika Allah menurunkan Azab bencana, tidak saja orang kafir dan munafik itu saja yg celaka tetapi juga mereka yg mukmin ikut terkena imbasnya.

Ustad DR. Menachem Ali, SS, M.MA adalah pakar Sejarah, Bahasa dan Budaya semitik dan Sanskrit dari Universitas Airlangga Surabaya, Beliau adalah mantan aktivis dan calon pendeta kristen KOS (Kenisah Orthodox Syiria) dan mantan kolega dari Abuna (Pendeta) Bambang Noorsena yg merupakan pendeta tertinggi KOS di indonesia, Nama sebelum Islam beliau adalah: Menachem Elijahu, sedangkan alasan beliau berpisah dgn Bambang Noorsena adalah karena dia sering melakukan kebohongan akademis demi mengikuti doktrin gereja yang jelas terbukti cacat sejarah dan cacat secara holy text serta sering melakukan Logical Fallacy (kekeliruan logika, membuat kekeliruan dengan sengaja pada suatu fakta sejarah atau logika, istilah akademisnya adalah Kebohongan Dialektika, Logical Fallacy merupakan suatu metode ilmu membalik nalar berdasarkan pada ilmu filsafat Platonis/ filsafat Yunani yg diajarkan di sekolah2 Theologi untuk menjadikan ajaran kristen sbg kebenaran, karena fakta jika ajaran kristen itu dibangun pd pondasi kebohongan yang sangat nyata untuk itu perlu ilmu membalikkan logika agar membuat ajaran Kristen menjadi ajaran yg benar2 dari Tuhan), dan semua risetnya justru mendukung kebenaran ajaran islam yang secara sengaja hendak dihilangkan keterkaitannya dalam akar ibrahim serta dgn sengaja pula memalsukan dokumen kuno agar sejarah kuno semitik mendukung doktrin gereja,,, Buku-buku hasil riset akademisnya terkait tentang dokumen kuno yahudi dan sanskrit telah diedarkan di berbagai negara di benua Amerika, Eropa dan Asia, penelitian dan risetnya banyak dilakukan di Israel, Marokko, Jordania & Azerbaijan,,,,
Karya2 Riset Akademis beliau:
1. “Qumran Manuscript & Prophets of Islam Among The Messiahs” (2019 Airlangga University Press, Prologue by Prof.DR.Thomas McElwain, Hebrew & Semitic Studies Professor at University of Stockholm & University of Turku, Finland)
2. “Aryo-Semitic Philology: the Semitization of Vedas & Sanskrit Elements in Hebrew and Abrahamic Texts” (Airlangga Press 2018, Prologue by Prof.Habib Zarbaliyev, Azerbaijan University of Language, Baku)
3. “Ishmael dalam Mushaf Masorah Ben Asher dan Naskah Khirbet Qumran/ Ishmael in Masoret Ben Asher Manuscript & Khirbet Qumran Texts” (Airlangga Press 2015)
4. “Discovering The Hebraic Roots of Islamic Messiah : A Study of Semitic Philology on The Hebrew Torah, The Jerusalem Talmud & The Midrash” (A.S.Noordeen-Canada 2009)

The Binding of Isaac or Ishmael? (Part 4)

Tafsir Nizam Al Qur'an

This is the last part of a 4 part article from Qur’anic Exegesis ‘Nizam-ul-Qur’an’ (نظام القرآن), written by a gifted Qur’anic Scholar from Indian Sub-Continent Sheikh Hamiduddin Farahis ( 1863-1930 AD) aguing that prophet Ismail (pbuh) as was sacrificed.

(Adaptation to English from Arabic by  Nadir Aqeel Ansari)

 


Reflections

 

Fifth Argument: Only Ismail deserved to be selected for the offering

The Torah states it explicitly that Ismail was the firstborn son of Abraham and it has been the established divine commandment of the law, from the days of Adam to those of Moses, that only the firstborn son can be offered. Nothing could override the superiority of being the firstborn. How can we imagine that Abraham, who was desired by God to be a perfect subject of God in all respects, would flout the oldest dictate of the divine law, in a matter which was meant to help him excel in spiritual perfection? How could he desist from offering his firstborn to God ? How could he offer Isaac

When Isaac was neither his firstborn nor his favorite son ? Recall that Ismail was born to him in response to his prayers to God, and when the second son Isaac was born, Abraham indicated that he was quite contended with his firstborn son, Ismail. Can we think of it even for a moment that Abraham could offer something to God which was not the best and the most beloved? We know that an offering is required to be the best thing out of the available ones.

Sixth Argument: Isaac was to be multiplied Exceedingly’ and hence could not be offered in his boyhood

God promised to `multiply Isaac exceedingly’ when the good news of his birth was announced to Abraham. Whereas God’s pomise to `multiply Ismail exceedingly’ was conveyed to Abraham either after the promise to Isaac or at the same time, i.e. after the Great Sacrifice took place.

`And when Abram was ninety years old, the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, `I am almighty God; walk before Me and be blameless. And I will make My convenant between you and me, and will multiply you exceedingly.’… The God said to Abraham, `As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai but Sarah shall be her name and I will bless her and also give you a son by her; then I will bless her and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be from her.’…. Then God said: Now Sarah your wife shall bear you a son and you shall call his name Isaac.’ (Genesis 17:1-19)

Is it pausible that God announce promise of `exceeding multiplication’ to Isaac and at the same time ask Abraham to offer him to Allah? Particularly when we know that on the occasion of the Great Sacrifice, Isaac was only a boy and had not married. He married when `Abraham was old and advanced in age.’ (Genesis 24:1) and Isacc was forty years old when he took Rebecca as wife (Genesis 25:20). And he had children when Abraham had died.

`And it came to pass, after the death of Abraham, ýýthat God blessed his son Isaac.’ (Genesis 25:11)

Also, Abraham died at the age of 175 years (Genesis 25:7). Bible also records that when Jacob was born to Rebecca, Isaac was 60 years odl (Genesis 25:27). It means that when Jacob was born, Abraham was alive (160 years old) because when Isaac was born, Abraham was 100 years old (Genesis 21:6). Even if we overlook the contradication between Genesis 25:11 and the above conclusion, we cannot fial to appreciate that Isaac had children at a very later age whereas the Bible and the Qur’an agree that the son offered as the Great Sacrifice was only a young boy. Therefore, it would be very difficult to carry the argument that Abraham offered Isaac after Isaac had been blessed with children.

Obviously the son could not be Isaac because if he was wanted by God as an offering in his boyhood, God’s promise that Isaac would be `multiplied exceedingly’ would have been rendered meaningless.

It may be asserted that Abraham knew beforehand that though he was offering Isaac, his son would come out alive and he would have descendants in a large number. In that case we would ask that if Abraham knew that the son he was offering to God would not die and would not only live but multiply exceedingly, how could it be termed it trial and a test of his loyalty to God ?

The Jews may still argue that the objection mentioned above valids against Muslim viewpoint as well. If Ismail were offered by Abraham, it would also have constituted an anomaly because God had also promised him a large progeny. Therefore, Ismail could have been sacrified in his boyhood. This analogy with Isaac’s case is not acceptable because of the following reasons:

  1. The promise of `exceeding multiplication’ of descendants to Isaac was made by God even before Isaac was born whereas in case of Ismail it was probably announced by God after the incident of the Great Sacrifice.
  2. In case of Ismail, the promise was made to Hagar while the command to offer him was addressed to Abraham. Whereas in Isaac’s case, the promise was made to Abraham and the order to offer him was also addressed to Abraham.
  3. In case of Isaac, the Jew believe that he was promised an `exceeding multiplication’ even before he was born, but when he was only a boy and had not married or had any children yet, Abraham was asked to sacrifice him.
Seventh Argument: The incident of Great Sacrifice occurred before Isaac’s birth

We have already shown that since the `only  son’ was offered for sacrifice and Ismail was the elder son (he was 14 years older than Isaac), it is established beyond any shadow of doubt that Ismail was offered as the Great Sacrifice. But at the same time the phrase `only son’ goes to prove that Isaac was not even born at that time. Had he born, it would have been more appropriate to use the phrase `firstborn’ instead of `only son’.

Here we would contend that not only Isaac was born after the Great Sacrifice had been offered, but his birth was actually one of the blessings that flowed from the Great Sacrifice.

There are other noteworthy facts which need to be noted in the seventeenth chapter of Genesis and which relate to the promise of `exceeding multiplication’ of the progeny of Isaac and Ismail. We also feel sure that they also point to the Great Sacrifice. The most important aspect is that they relate to some of the events of the time, which has assisted us in resolving issues that are closely related with our subject.

In this chapter Abraham is asked to submit to God in totality. At this time he is 99 years old and Isaac is not born yet. Around this time, the command of circumcision is ordained. That is why Abraham and Ismail carry out this command the same day. Ismail was then 13 years old. And God announced an everlasting covenant to Abraham and declared circumcision the emblem of this everlasting covenant and his progeny. Then God promised `exceeding multiplication’ of progeny to Ismail and also heralded the birth of Isaac and `exceeding multiplication’ of his progeny. If the contents of this chapter are kept in mind, it becomes less difficult to understand what we have to contend.

We are unable to understand how the unusual divine acts of command for complete submission and tidings of great blessings and making an everlasting covenant could be the result of a paltry ritual of circumcision. The day of announcing the desirability of circumcision cannot be the occasion of these grand promises. We believe that there was a mention of something much more grand, for which these everlasting and far reaching commandments were given. This point was deleted by the Jews. There can be only one plausible answer. It was God’s command to offer Ismail. When Abraham came out of this test honorably, he was blessed with the news of another son. However, the fact was concealed and later on obliterated from the text by the Jews. This also explains our eariler argument that Isaac’s birth was nothing more than one of the blessings that came upon Abraham as a result of the Great Sacrifice.

This evidence is further corroborated by the other details related to the Great Sacrifice, such as the conclusion that Abraham was blessed because he did not refuse his sons life to please God. We also need to appreciate the fact that the son who was offered to God had not been blessed with the good news of `exceeding multiplication’ till he succeeded in this trial; hence God’s words:

`And the Angel of the Lord called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time, and said, `By myself have I sworn, says the Lord, for because you have done this thing and have not withheld your son your only son, that in blessing I will bless you and in multiplying I will multiply your seed as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is upon the seashore; and your seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because you have obeyed my voice.’ (Genesis 22:15-18)

This shows that the blessings showered upon Ismail, the trials faced by Abraham and Abraham’s complete submission and making an everlasting covenant form the same chain of events of the same occasion. This is the occasion when Abraham is given the good news of Isaac. One should imagine how could Isaac be offered as the Great Sacrifice when he was not even born !

The good news of Isaac’s birth is itself sufficient testimony that his birth was the result and fruit of Abraham’s total submission before the will of God which he demonstrated by offering his only son. The real spirit of the Great Sacrifice was to dedicate Ismail to God. Abraham is only fulfiling this prophecy when he says, `O that Ismail might live before you.’ The meaning of the phrase `before God’ has adequately been explained in the beginning of this tract.

Ismail was thirteen years old on the eve of the Great Sacrifice. This is the best and the most important age of one’s childhood. And childhood is adorned by all the qualities of head and heart, the beauties of body, and purities of mind and soul, the child becomes priceless and its value boundless. These years must have been the beginning of his maturity and sensibility. He would have started to attract the immense love and deep affection of his father. He must have begun to assist his father in the errands with all his beauty, upbrinning and etiquette. Who can question the fact that he loved his son and cared for him even more than he cared for himself. No doubt, offering such a dear son to God was a great trial since Abraham came out of this trial with honour, he was blessed with the eternal honour of an everlasting covenant and many other bounties. It was not because of carrying out the ritual of circumcision, which would rendered the whole thing meaningless. Indeed, those who, out of prejudice, intentionally want to avoid truth get fatelly trapped in the mire of such erroneous beliefs.

Eighth Argument: Ismail was God’s offering

Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac. But Abraham gave gifts to the sons of the concubines which Abraham had; and while he was still living he sent them eastward, away from Isaac his son, to the country of the east. This is the sum of the years of Abrahm’s life which he lived: one hundred and seventy-five years. Then Abrahm breathed his last and died in a good old age, an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people. And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah. (Genesis 25:5-9)

Two conclusions can safely be deduced from these verses of the Old Testament.

First, that Abraham had not sent Isaac or Ismail away from himself to far off places because they kept visiting him and attended his burial. This proximity and intimacy was not granted to the sons of his concubines.

Second, Ismail was not bequeathed any property as Isaac, nor was he given any gifts as the sons of Abraham’s concubines.

It is quite difficult to explain how Abraham could deprive his firstborn son of inheritence, a son who continued to look after him till his death, particularly when the status of the firstborn son could not be stripped of by any means.

This discrepancy can only be resolved by presuming that Ismail had been offerred and dedicated to God. And as we have shown earlier, according to the Torah, a person offered to God had no right of inheritance. (Deutronomy 10:8-9 and 18:1-3)

Ninth Argument : Before the Lord

There are several indications in the Torah which show that Ismail was dedicated to God for his service and was an offering to God. An illuminating evidence is the prayer of Abraham on the occasion of Isaac’s birth:

`Oh that Ismail might live before you.’ (Genesis 17:18)

The words `before you’ show that Ismail had been devoted to the worship of God and the service of `His house’. Otherwise only the prayer `Oh that Ismail might live’ could have sufficed. We showed earlier that the phrase `before the Lord’ means ones dedication to God and presence in and service to the Bait El (House of Lord). This is what forms the cornerstone of the concept of Ismail being sacrificed and offered to God.

====

The Binding of Isaac or Ishmael? (Part 3)

Tafsir Nizam Al Qur'an

This is the third part of a 4 part article from Qur’anic Exegesis ‘Nizam-ul-Qur’an’ (نظام القرآن), written by a gifted Qur’anic Scholar from Indian Sub-Continent Sheikh Hamiduddin Farahis ( 1863-1930 AD) aguing that prophet Ismail (pbuh) as was sacrificed.

(Adaptation to English from Arabic by  Nadir Aqeel Ansari)

 

 


 

Reflections

Despite the assertion of the Torah (Genesis, Ch 22), this author is convinced, because of the evidence in hand, that Abraham had in fact offered his son Ismail and not Isaac to Allah the Almighty.

First Argument: The abode of Abraham and Ismail

It is apparent from the context that when Abraham left to offer his son, he was accompanied by Ismail and not Isaac. It was Ismail who was residing with his father. Those who tampered with the text to introduce Isaac’s name failed to comprehend this fact and this shows that Isaac’s name is indeed a later addition.

Bible affirms that after the incident Abraham returned to Beersaba which shows that Abraham was already dwelling at Beersaba. This is explicitly stated in Chapter 21. And this is indeed the truth. Beersaba is the place where Ismail lived with his mother. This fact is further underlined when the Torah relates the event of separation of Ismail and his mother from Isaac and his mother:

“So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin of water and putting it on her shoulder, he gave it and the boy to Hagar, and sent her away. Then she departed and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheva … So God was with the lad and he grew and dwelt in the wilderness.” (Genesis, 21:14-19)

This passage refers to `wilderness’ and `wilderness of Beersheba’ because Beersheba was an uninhabited wasteland. Abraham had to bore seven wells and plant trees in it and hence its name. (Beersheba means `seven wells’). This discussion leads to the following conclusions:

  1. Ismail and her mother Hagar dwelt in Beersheba.
  2. This place was away from the abode of Isaac and his mother.
  3. Abraham also lived here because it was from this place that he left for the sacrifice and then returned, after the sacrifice.

The abode of Sarah was at a distance from this Beersheba; that is why Abraham had to undertake a journey when he heard of Sarah’s death:

“So Sarah died in Kirjath Arba (that is Hebron) in the land of Canaan, and Abraham came to mourn for Sarah and to weep for her.” (Genesis, 23:2)

This shows that on the day Abraham proceeded to sacrifice his son, he took Ismail with him who was residing with him in Beersheba and not Isaac who was living with Sarah far away in Canaan. This is subject to the presumption that Isaac was born by that time, as claimed by the Jews. Otherwise, we believe that Isaac was not even born by that time. Isaac was born after the event of sacrifice as we will show later on.

From the details of the event, it is evident that the son offered in sacrifice was left there by Abraham and was allowed to settle and reside beside the altar. This fact is further confirmed by the words uttered by Abraham on the occasion of the birth of Isaac:`Oh, that Ishmael might live before you.(ie remain in the service of Lord’s House)’, (Genesis 17:18). We have clarified earlier that the phrase, `before the Lord’ means `in the service of the house of the Lord’. The Holy Quran also verifies this statement:

“Abraham said: “Lord I have settled some of my offspring in a barren valley near Your Sacred House, so that they may observe true worship.” (14:37)

Now who is referred to as the one `living near the Sacred House of God (Ka’aba)’? He is definitely Ismail, as both the Christians and Muslims agree that Isaac continued to reside in Canaan along with his mother. For himself, Abraham selected a place midway between the abodes of Isaac and Ismail so that he may see his sons frequently and at the same time remain close to the Holy Ka’aba. That is why when he died, both his sons were with him.

“And his sons Isaac and Ismail buried him.” (Genesis, 25:9)

Second Argument: Ismail was the only son of his father

We have observed earlier that Abraham had been desired by the God to sacrifice his only son (Genesis, Ch 22). Clearly, the only son was Ismail because he was fourteen years older than Isaac:

“Abram was eighty six years old when Hagar bore Ismail to Abram.” (Genesis, 16:16)

“Now Abram was one hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him.” (Genesis 21:5)

It flows from these two verses that a) Ismail was Abraham’s only son till such time that Isaac was born, and b) he was this only son whom Abraham sacrificed even before Isaac was born because after that Ismail could no more be referred to as the only son.

Both these conclusions are sufficient evidence from the Old Testament that Abraham offered Ismail in sacrifice. Here it becomes so evident that it gets impossible to be denied. But the Jews and Christians have argued that Ismail had been sent away and Abraham was only left with Isaac, and in a way Isaac became the only son with Abraham at that time. Thus Genesis records him to be the only son, in a figurative sense only. This interpretation is not sustainable because:

  1. In fact, Isaac and not Ismail had been sent away. Ismail was actually living with his parents in Beersaba.
  2. The figurative interpretation of `the only son’ is very far-fetched. The phrase `only son’ is used for the son who does not share his parents’ love and affection with any other siblings.

Actually, it must have been `your first born son’ in Genesis Ch 22 which appears to have been changed over to `your only son’. The change must have been brought about with the motive to exclude Ismail but instead it went to prove that Ismail was sacrificed even before Isaac was born.

Third Argument: Ismail was his father’s beloved son

In Chapter 22, the son to be offered to God was referred to as `your only son whom you love’. This also goes to show that Ismail is meant here because the Old Testament on more than one occasion indicates that Abraham doted on Ismail. Abraham specially prayed to God for him:

“But Abram said: Lord God what will you give me seeing I go childless and the heir on my house is Eliezer of Damascus ?” Then Abram said: Look You have given me no offspring; indeed one born in my house is my heir! And behold the word of the Lord came to him saying: This one shall not be your heir, but one who will come from your own body shall be your heir.” (Genesis, 15:2-4)

That is why when he bore the son, he named him Ishmael which meant Lord has heard your affliction. It is quite imaginable that Ismail must be his father’s favourite and blue eyed son. Let us imagine an old man who has no offspring and feels dejected on this account, beseeches God for an offspring and when he is blessed with a son at an advanced age, names him Ismail which means God has heard the affliction. Then keeps him pressed to his bosom for thirteen long years. He is all he can pin his hopes on for his old age, and sees no chances for another child. In these circumstances, it can be well imagined how the father would dote on his only son!

Then again when Lord the God promises the birth of another son (Isaac) to Abraham, he utters words which further bring out his special feelings for Ismail. It appears that after the birth of Ismail he is so indebted to God that he is not harbouring any more desires.

“Then Abram fell on his knees and laughed, and said in his heart: shall a child be born to a man who is one hundred years old? And shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child ? And Abraham said to God: Oh , that Ishmael might live before you!” (Genesis 17:17-18)

These feelings are pronounced by Abraham when God is breaking to him the good news of another son. The words, `might live before you’ betray a love that is difficult to fathom. The affection is welling in a fashion that it is difficult for him to conceal it even before God.

Another instance also illustrates Abraham’s love for Ismail. When Sarah wishes to cast out Ismail and his mother and intends to disinherit Ismail, Abraham finds it very displeasing:

“And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing. Therefore, she said to Abraham: Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, namely with Isaac. And the matter was very displeasing in Abraham’s sight becausof his son.” (Genesis 21:9-11)

Fourth Argument: The incident occurred at Marwah which is situated by the Ka`ba

We have read that when Abraham set out for the sacrifice: `On the third day Abraham lifted his eyes and saw the place afar off’, (Genesis 22:4). The Jews deem this place to be the Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem, while Christians consider it to be the place where Christ was crucified. But their own authorities maintain that this idea has no foundation. We quote their differences on this point from J. W. Colenso a biblical scholar. He has summarized the varied viewpoints and then summed up by recording his findings, thereby acknowledging the extent of changes introduced in the Scripture by human hands. He has pointed out that the place Muriah has been referred to in the Old Testament on four different occasions, and every time it is rendered differently in different versions by the Septuagint and Hebrew Bible.

Septuagint Hebrew Bible

Genesis 22:2 high land the land of Mureh

Genesis 12:6 high terebinth tree the plain of Mureh

Deuteronomy 11:30 beside the high terebinth beside the plain of Mureh

Judges 7:1 by the hill of Mureh by the hill of Mureh

Then even the various translations of the Septuagint do not agree. The Septuagint reads Genesis 22:2 as “high land” whereas Aquila puts it as “prominent land” and Symmachus as “The land of the Vision” 1. Moreover, as we shall see later, not only is it interpreted differently but is also transcribed in more than one renditions when it comes to writing it in Hebrew. J. W. Colenso has contested the claim that Moriah is the hill on which Solomon’s Temple now stands in Jerusalem on the strength of the following proofs:

1. The word Moriah has nowhere been used for the Temple. In the words of Colenso: `The word is not mentioned in any book of the Old Testament which in chronology is later than Solomon’s book.2 The hill on which Solomon erected the temple is always recalled as Zion in the books of the Prophets and Psalms. The word Moriah is never used for the Temple.’

2. The characteristics of Moriah do not agree with those of the site of Temple.

We find the second statement notably cogent. Colinso reasons that the Torah asserts that the place was conspicuous from a distance to which Abraham lifted his eyes, whereas there is no such place at the site of the Temple which suits this description. It is interesting to note that when Mount of the Temple is approached from the east through the Valley of the son of Hinnom, one has to look downhill to behold it, hence the pointlessness of `lifting the eyes’ in Genesis 22. Colinso has also drawn strength from an excerpt by Stanley:

“In the morning Abraham set out from the camp heading for the place indicated by the Lord. The Jews claim it was a place in Jerusalem on the Hill of Moriah, but I do not agree. The Christians insist it was located near the Church of the Holy Tomb. But this idea is even more flimsy. Muslims believe that it was a place in Mecca on Mount Arafat. This view sounds even more odd and baseless. It would be very plausible to look for this place on Mount Gerizim. Its topography also resembles that of an altar.”

It is out of ignorance that this author has ascribed to Muslims, the view of placing the scene of this historic sacrifice on Mount Arafat. To my knowledge no Muslim holds this opinion. As goes for Mount Gerizim, it is believed to be the site of the Altar in question, by the Samaritans, a Jewish sect, which proclaims a different Torah and has more affinity with the Christians than any other Jewish sect could have.

We have dilated on these views only to show that there are wide differences about determining the exact location of Moreh, the site of the Great Sacrifice. A section of biblical scholars has eliminated the name altogether, substituting it with “high terebinths” or “prominent land” or “the land of vision” in subsequent translations. Others have preserved the name but have corrupted the text by adopting the different pronunciations of Moreh, Muriah and Moriah. This is the same age old ruse of jumbling up fact and fiction which has been lamented by the Quran:

“O you People of the Scripture! Why do you confound truth with falsehood and knowingly conceal the Truth?” (3:71)

The correct word is undoubtedly Marwah (the famous hill near Ka’aba in Mecca) and not Moriah or Moreh. The word means shining smooth stone and is precedented frequently in pre-Islamic Arabic poetry.

Now the Hebrew word Moreh is derived either from Yara (fear or wonder) or Yarah (archery or moistening)3. Had the original word been Moreh, as the existing text suggests, the biblical translators would have preferred these meanings instead of “prominent land” or “land of vision”. The scribes of Pentateuch appear to have found it originally in the form Marwah but being the proper name of an unknown place situated far away in Arabia, it was difficult for them to translate it. Incidentally, there was a similar Hebrew word Marah which is derived from Ra’ah (Vision). The scribes mistook Marwah for Marah and in their effort to make the word meaningful to their predominantly Hebrew readers, translated it “Vision” and “Prominent”. When the translations became canonized with the passage of time, the original word was lost or confused and the Biblical scholars ended up with the word Moreh or Moriah.

In translations or versions where the name of the place has not been translated and the original name appears to have been preserved, the various extant forms of the word still suggest that it must have been Marwah.

The confusion was spawned by the fact that the classical Hebrew script had no indications of vowels. These were introduced later. In the absence of an oral tradition of transmission where people would commit the text to memory, the original accents and pronunciations could not be preserved. Consequently, the erroneous insertion of vowels sometimes completely changed the form of words and opened a floodgate of textual corruption. The word in question would have been originally written devoid of vowels but of course with a definite pronunciation. It suffered transformation later when vowels were added.4

Let us study this transformation in some detail. This transformation took three forms.

Original Form Changed Form Possible Pronunciation

Marwah Muryah Muriyyah

Mooriyah Mooriyaah

Mooreh Mooreh

The mechanism by which these changes came around needs to be considered. In the first case, the word Marwah was converted to Muryah. This is because the Arabic letter “w” is usually converted into Hebrew letter “y” (Yodh); for example Jol was turned into Jyl, Khoh into Khyh. This fact becomes more transparent when we find that in all roots which are common in Arabic and Hebrew, the Arabic “w” is changed to the Hebrew “y”, for instance we may note the change from Walo to Waly. It is still more evident when a root which is common in Arabic and Hebrew begins with “w”, such as the conversion of Arabic Walad to Hebrew Yalad, Ward to Yarad, Waqr to Yaqar and Wa’az to Ya’az. This shifting of syllables occurred either because of the convenience it offered in pronouncing the word, or because of the similarity in the way Hebrew alphabets “Waw” and “Yodh” are written.

The second change from Marwah to Moriyah occurred because they presumed that the letter “Mem” carried a vowel (sounding like Hebrew letter “Waw” or English letter O) and carried the presumption too far by replacing the vowel with letter “Waw”. This is not unusual in Hebrew and we have other examples such as the transformation of Y’tar to Yotar.

In the third case, the word Marwah (Arabic M’rwah) got converted into Morah (Hebrew Mwrah) when letters “Res” (English letter R) and “Waw” were allowed to exchange their places. Either it was in consonance with their habit of making like changes in Arabic words (such as their adoption of Jar’w as J’wr, Hafi as Yahaf, Alo as Ya’al, Kahal as Kalah) or because of the close resemblance between letters “Res” and “Waw” in Hebrew script. The latter probability is always there, particularly when the scribes deliberately intend to corrupt the text. There are many occasions when the Biblical scribhave actually thrived on this confusion because of similarity in written form of these letters. For instance they changed B’r’s into Bos.

It remains to be seen where this venue of the Great Sacrifice is actually located. The Jews consider it to be the place in Jerusalem where the Temple is situated. Christians place it at the Church of Holy Tomb. These claims have been sufficiently rebutted by their own intellectuals. As far as Stanley’s claim of identifying Moreh with Mount Gerizim is concerned, it is only based on conjecture. The mountain assumes the form of a table like plateau which strikingly resembles the shape of an altar. This led Stanley to believe that the altar referred to, in Genesis, must be Mount Gerizim. But unfortunately there are no compelling reasons to believe it. Also there is hardly anyone in the West who is for Stanley in his unique finding and scholars are hesitant to receive it.

We hold that this is exactly the same place in the Arabian Peninsula where the Children of Ismail have lived since earliest times and which has always been known as Marwah. The Book of Judges states:

“Then Jerubbaal (that is Gideon) and all the people who were with him rose early and encamped beside the well of Harod so that the camp of the Midianites was on the north side of them by the hill of Moreh in the valley.” (Judges, 7:1)

This illustrates that the Hill of Moreh was situated by the side of the Midianite camp and it is an established fact that by Midianites the Old Testament means the Arabs. The word is commonly used for the Arabs. Jewish scriptures are quite loud on it that Midianites were in fact the children of Ismail. George Sale, who has to his credit the first English version of the Holy Quran, states:

“Midian was one of the cities of Hijaz (Arabia). It was situated in the south east of Sinai on Red Sea. Doubtlessly, this is the same place which is referred to by Ptolemy as Modiana.”

The Old Testament further asserts:

“Then the men of Israel said to Gideon: Rule over us, both you and your son, and your grandson also; for you have delivered us from the hand of Midian.

But Gideon said to them: I will not rule over you; the Lord shall rule over you. Then Gideon said to them: I would like to make a request of you, that each of you would give me the ear-rings from his plunder. For they had golden ear-rings, because they were Ishmaelites.” (Judges 8:22-23)

“And they sat down to eat a meal. Then they lifted their eyes and looked and there was a company of Ishmaelites, coming from Gilead with their camel, bearing spices, balm, and myrrh on their way to carry them on to Egypt. So Judah said to his brothers: What profit is there if we kill our brother and conceal his blood? Come and let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother and our flesh. And his brothers listened. Then Midianite traders passed by; so the brothers pulled Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmailites for twenty shekels of silver. And they took Joseph to Egypt.” (Genesis, 37:25-28)

Thus Moreh was a place in the abode of Midianites and Midianites is only another name for Ismaelites, and Midian is a town situated in Arabia on the coast of Red Sea. We have also shown that Moreh is in fact the corrupted form of Marwah and there is no place in Palestine or Syria with the name of Moreh. The Jews introduced the name Moreh in their scriptures and tried to identify more than one spots with it, a contention which they could not get accepted even by their own authorities. This leaves the argument that Moreh is actually Mount Jerusalem, devoid of any strength.5

There are other reasons to believe that Marwah is actually a hill in Arabia, the land of Children of Ismail. In fact, it is one of the places with which the Arabs were quite familiar and it was the center of their religious rites on the occasion of Haj wherein it was mandatory to rally around it. That is why when the name Marwah is mentioned in the Quran, the details of its geographical location were deemed unnecessary. It has been indicated that it is one of the Signs of God and that the People of the Book tried to conceal it by textual interpolations although Allah had elaborately explained it. The detail of these statements of the Quran will appear in the second chapter.

The Holy Prophet Muhammad (sws), while watching the animals waiting to be sacrificed by Marwah, is reported to have pointed at Marwah and said: `This is The Altar and all roads to Mecca are altars.’ On another occasion, he is reported to have said that Mina is also an altar. Here we must note that the Prophet Peace be upon him declares Marwah to be “The Altar” (with a definite article), whereas the other places are referred to as “altars” (with indefinite article) which reduces them to the status of merely being one of the many altars.

The Holy Quran illustrates this fact from another angle. Referring to the animals brought for offering on Haj it observes:

“In the end, their place of offering is near the ancient house [The Ka’aba].” (22:33)

“… the offering brought to the Ka’aba.” (5:95)

This means that the animals brought for the offering should reach Ka’aba, because The Altar is situated near the “ancient house” which was raised in the beginning for this purpose.

“The first house (of worship) ever to be built was that at Bekka, a blessed place and a beacon for nations.” (3:96)

Now Marwah is situated beside Holy Ka’aba and it is The Altar. However with the passage of time as the followers of Islam spread through the world, the ambit of The Altar was also expanded around it. The Muslims and People of the Book concur that The Altar of Abraham was in the proximity of the Baitullah (House of Allah) which the Bible terms as Bethel (House of the Lord):

“Abraham passed through the land to the place of Shechem as far as Moreh and the Canaanites were then in the land. Then the Lord appeared to Abram and said: To your descendants I will give this land. And there he built an altar to the Lord, who had appeared to him. And he moved from there to the Mountain east of Bethel ( House of Lord) and he pitched his tent with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east; there he built an altar to the Lord and called on the name of the Lord.”(Genesis, 12:6-8)

Other details of the incident as stated in the Old Testament, also conform to the surroundings of Marwah and do not agree with the location of Mount Jerusalem, which is called erroneously as Moreh, Moriyah or Muriyah by the Jews. A comparison of all statements shows that Abraham, in fact, came from the East, left both his slaves on a hill nearby, and zealously marched to Marwah with his only son, Ismail. And as indicated in Genesis 12:1-8, Abraham lived somewhere around Safa. On this occasion the Torah relates yet another version of Abraham’s journey to Moreh but the incident of the great sacrifice is not mentioned. (Gen 12:6)

These are the reasons which have given birth to the age old traditions and religious rites and customs among the Arabian tribe of Ismail which have survived to our times; and such traditional remnants are conspicuously absent in respect of Mount Jerusalem.

(To be Continued)