Regarding Baalbek of the Phoenicians and their Identity According to the Arabs

13062222_1162450353807959_2835293669760902075_n

Baalbek, Lebanon.

It is recorded in Arabic historical references dated back as far as the 9th century by Al Tabari and later by Ibn Khaldun the founder of sociology Baalbek was built by the Phoenicians who were a major group of Canaanite Arabs known as Banu Kinanah. The Al-Mawsu’at Al-Filastinniya (Palestinian encyclopedia) states, “The Palestinians are the descendants of the Jebusites, who are of Arab origin”, and describes Jerusalem as “an Arab city because its first builders were the Canaanite Jebusites, whose descendants are the Palestinians”. The American Committee for Jerusalem in 2001 declared, “According to a number of historians and scholars, many of the Arabs of Jerusalem today, indeed the majority of Palestinian Arabs, are descendants of the ancient Jebusites and Canaanites.” Webster’s New World Encyclopedia states, ‘The Palestinian people are descendants of the people of Canaan.’  Banu Kinanah, or Canaanites were divided in four branches: An-Nadr, Abdumanat, Malakan, and Malak. Tabari wrote, “… the descendants of al-Nadr ibn Kinana were called Quraysh”.

It was the Greek invaders who first called the land of Canaan “Phoenicia”, which meant “purple”. The Canaanites were known for their red and purple cloth (a purple dye was extracted from murex snails found near the shores of Palestine, a method now lost). The Greek historian Strabo believed that the Phoenicians originated from Al Bahrain. Herodotus also believed that the homeland of the Phoenicians was Al Bahrain, or the region located in the north eastern part of the Arabian Peninsula, this region extends from Kuwait all the way down to include parts of the eastern region of Saudi Arabia and modern-day Bahrain. Biblically speaking, the Phoenicians were enemies of Israelites.

Through their maritime trade, the Arab Phoenicians spread the use of the alphabet to Anatolia, North Africa and Europe, where it was adopted by the Greeks, who later transmitted it to the Romans. The writing system of the Phoenicians is the source of the writing systems of nearly all of Europe, including Greek, Russian, Hebrew, and the Roman alphabet. Today all Phoenician alphabets are mutually comprehensible to Arabic language speakers. Unlike other languages who claim a link to the Phoenician writing system but write from left to write, the classical Arabic language like Phoenician is written from right to left and the resemblance is striking between the Phoenician writing style and both the Nabatean script from which the Kufic writing style developed and with the earliest Hejazi writing.

The Phoenician empire fell under Hellenistic rule after being invaded by Alexander the Great about 332 B.C. In 64 B.C. the name of Phoenicia disappeared entirely, becoming a part of the Roman providence of Syria.

Khazinat Firoun, Petra - Pharaoh's Treasury known as Al Khazneh, Petra. Built by the Nabatean Arabs.

Khazinat Firoun, Petra – Pharaoh’s Treasury known as Al Khazneh, Petra. Built by the Nabatean Arabs. The similarities to Baalbek building style are obvious. The Ishmaelites (Arabs) descended maternally from the ancient Egyptian monarchy from Ishmael’s mother Hajra

Nabatean Pillars of Bosra, Syria. Again, similarities to the Baalbek site are clear.

Nabatean Pillars of Bosra, Syria. Again, similarities to the Baalbek site are clear.

The sarcophagus of Eshmunazar II, a Phoenician king of Sidon and the son of King Tabnit. It was unearthed in 1855 at a site near Sidon and is now in the Louvre.

The sarcophagus of Eshmunazar II, a Phoenician king of Sidon and the son of King Tabnit. It was unearthed in 1855 at a site near Sidon, Lebanon and is now in the Louvre. The Ishmaelites (Arabs) descended maternally from the ancient Egyptian monarchy from Ishmael’s mother Hajra

Colossal statues of the Ishmaelite Lihyan kings of Arabia. The ancient Lihyanites were the sons of Lihyan ibn Hothail. They were the predecessors of the Lords of Quraysh (Sadat), and were the rulers of northwestern Hijaz, who controlled the well of Zam Zam prior to the rise of the sons of Quraysh.

Colossal statues of the Ishmaelite Lihyan kings of Arabia. The ancient Lihyanites were the sons of Lihyan ibn Hothail. They were the predecessors of the Lords of Quraysh (Sadat), and were the rulers of northwestern Hijaz, who controlled the well of Zam Zam prior to the rise of the sons of Quraysh.

Eight Naqshbandi GrandShaykhs of the Great Mughal Sultanate of Hindustan

image

Painting of Emperor Zahir ud-Din Muhammad Babur

Eight venerable GrandShaykhs of the Most Distinguished Naqshbandi Golden Chain who carried the Imami line lived in the Delhi Sultanate during the Mughal Era – Khwaja Muhammad al-Baqi bi-l-Lah (1565-1603), Ahmad as-Sirhindi (1563-1624), Muhammad al-Masum (1598/99-1668), Muhammad Sayfuddin al-Mujaddidi (1639/40-1684), as-Sayyid Nur Muhammad al-Badawani (-1722), Shams al-Din HabibAllah (1699/1700-1798), Shah Ghluam ‘Ali ‘AbdAllah ad-Dahlawi (1745-1824) and Mawlana Dhiya al-Din Khalid al-Baghdadi (1778-1826).

The founder of the Mughal Empire Babur – himself a Naqshbandi according to the Babur Namah – attributed his success to the spiritual support of the Saints of the Naqshbandi Golden Chain.

image

Made For Mughal Emperors: Royal Treasures From Hindustan by Susan Stronge

The Mughal Empire literally collapsed after the Imami branch of the Naqshbandi Order left Mughal India during the reign of Shah Alam II (d. 1806) with the migration of Mawlana Dhiya al-Din Khalid al-Baghdadi (1778-1826).

image

King of the World: Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan's drinking vessel, made in Hindustan. This bowl has Naad i-'Ali and the names of the illustrious Twelve Imams engraved on it. Here, you can read the following names written together, wa 'Ali (Zayn al-Abidin) wa Muhammad al-Baqir, wa Ja'far al-Sadiq wa Musa al-Kadhim, wa 'Ali al-Ridha wa Muhammad al-Taqi, wa 'Ali an-Naqi wa Hasan al-'Askari. Picture from, 'Made For Mughal Emperors: Royal Treasures From Hindustan' by Susan Stronge, p.187.

Shaykh Hisham Kabbani writes, “He (Mawlana Khalid al-Baghdadi) was the Center of the Circle of Qutbs in his time…He memorized the Books of the Ithna ‘Ashari (Twelve Imams), the source-books for the knowledge of the descendants of Sayyidina `Ali “If Shaykh Khalid al-Baghdadi is not a believer, then who is a believer?” (The Naqshbandi Sufi Way History and Guidebook of the Saints of the Golden Chain, Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, KAZI Publications Inc., 1995).

In his Maktubat i-Rabbani, Ahmad as- Sirhindi (1563-1624) wrote to the Mughal Sultan in Delhi, “…And there is another way close to the spiritual sovereignty and this is the way of the Saints and the general friends of Allah, and this way is marked by its characteristic passion and it carries the guarantee of mediation and the leader and chieftain of the Saints of this way is ‘Ali al-Murtada. And this grand office is reserved for him. On this way, the feet of the Holy Prophet are on ‘Ali’s head and Fatima and Hasan and Husayn are included with him. I believe that he enjoyed this position even before his physical birth, as he did after it, and whosoever has received the divine blessing and guidance, has received it through him, because he is closest to the last point on this way and the centre of this spot belongs to him. And when his period ended, the grand office passed on to Hasan and Husayn and then on to each one of the Twelve Imams, individually and elaborately. And whosoever received guidance in their life and after their death, received it through these Saints. And the refuge and place of shelter of the Saints of high ranks are these Saints, (because they are the centre of all spiritual activity) and the sides tend to converge on the centre” (Maktubat, Volume 9:173#123).

image

Bahadur Shah Zafar in 1858, just after his trial and before his departure for exile in Burma.

Following Shah Alam II’s rule,  Akbar Shah II (d. 1837) became the Titular figurehead under British protection and his successor Bahadur Shah II (d.1862) became the Last Mughal Emperor.  Bahadur Shah II was deposed by the British (Gog Magog) and exiled to Burma after the Indian Rebellion of 1857.

image

“The Second Chain of the Naqshbandiyya is traced through Imam ‘Ali ibn Musa al-Rida radiAllahu anhu” – Ashraf Ali Thanwi

image

Imdad ul-Fatawa Vol. 6. 'The Fatawa of Hakim ul-Ummat Hazrat Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi: Complied by Hazrat Moulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi Saheb, Grand Mufti of Pakistan

In Imdad ul-Fatawa Ashraf Ali Thanwi writes: “…in fact, all of the chains of Wiliyat connect to the Holy Prophet ﷺ through the mediumship of the Ahl al-Bayt. As such, a chain of the Naqshbandiyya is traced from Hazrat Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq, and their second chain is traced through Hazrat ‘Ali radiAllahu ‘anhu, Hazrat Imam Husayn radiAllahu ‘anhu, Hazrat Imam Zayn al-‘Abidin radiAllahu ‘anhu, Hazrat Imam Muhammad al-Baqir radiAllahu ‘anhu, Hazrat Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq radiAllahu ‘anhu, Hazrat Imam Musa al-Kadhim radiAllahu ‘anhu, Hazrat Imam ‘Ali ibn Musa al-Rida radiAllahu ‘anhu. The Qadiri chain has Hazrat Imam Hasan radiAllahu ‘anhu….the Chistiyya chain has Hazrat ‘Ali and the Suharwardi chain has Hazrat Imam ‘Ali Musa Rida…”[Imdad ul-Fatawa Vol. 6. ‘The Fatawa of Hakim ul-Ummat Hazrat Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi: Complied by Hazrat Moulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi Saheb, Grand Mufti of Pakistan’. Published by Zakaria Book Depot. Deoband, Saharanpur, U.P., India]

image

"...in fact, all of the chains of Wiliyat connect to the Holy Prophet ﷺ through the mediumship of the Ahl al-Bayt. As such, a chain of the Naqshbandiyya is..."

image

"... a chain of the Naqshbandiyya is traced from Hazrat Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq, and their second chain is traced through Hazrat 'Ali radiAllahu 'anhu, Hazrat Imam Husayn radiAllahu 'anhu, Hazrat Imam Zayn al-'Abidin radiAllahu 'anhu, Hazrat Imam Muhammad al-Baqir radiAllahu 'anhu, Hazrat Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq radiAllahu 'anhu, Hazrat Imam Musa al-Kadhim radiAllahu 'anhu, Hazrat Imam 'Ali ibn Musa al-Rida radiAllahu 'anhu..."

Should Naqshbandi Sufi Muslims Who Reside in Democratic Societies Vote?

image

Sultan ul-Awliya al-Sayyid al-Sharif Mawlana Shaykh Nazim al-Qubrusi with His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI

Q. As salamu alaikum! As Shaykh Nazim and you are opposed to democracy, I will not cast a vote in the upcoming GHMC elections. Is this correct or should I just vote for the Muslim candidate instead?

A. Wa alaikum as salam wa rahamtullahi wa barakatuhu. Our position is similar to the Catholics who also follow an Abrahamic religon. Catholics who live in democratic nations do their best to participate socially and politically in their respective nations while maintaining a distinct Catholic identify and set of beliefs all along. Many Catholic lobbies strive to make their nations hear and reconcile with their view point on issues like abortion, gay marriage etc., and participate in the democratic process while at the same time maintaining an open loyalty to their Saints of the Church and spiritual allegiance to the Pope and Vatican City. Vatican City is an absolute monarchy and the Pope an absolute monarch. Similarly, in our view, after the restoration of our Arab caliphate, Muslim citizens living in democratic nations will continue to be loyal to Awliya, Aqtab, Abdaal and Awtad etc., and will have spiritual allegiance to the Arab Hashemite dynastic caliph from the Ahl al-Bayt – who rules an absolute monarchy as an absolute monarch – while at the same time continuing to be outstanding citizens of their respective democratic nations. President John F. Kennedy was a devout Catholic and the President of the United States of America at the same time. There is no issue nor conflict with such a religious and ideological ‘arrangement’ in our view.  The caliphate of the Arabs and Ahl al-Bayt will be restored according to prophesy very soon, perhaps even within the next three years if Allah permits. Arabs will continue to live in Arabia and the Arab Middle East to which they have always been indigenous according to history – unlike most citizens of the Jewish State who are in fact European – while non-Arabs in non-Arab nations. Given Her Majesty’s official royal descent from the House of David, my initial hypothesis was – like al-Mahdi in the Greater Arab Middle East from Mecca/Madinah/Jerusalem-Palestine/Iraq – Jesus would rule the West from Buckingham Palace, as the British monarchy is a heriditary monarchy unlike Vatican City. However, it seems the British monarchy – shared by Canada – is getting weaker by the day and will most likely be abolished – like the Turkish monarchy – by the Christian Zionists sooner than later.  Hence, it is quite possible upon his return Jesus will instead possibly make Vatican City centre of his kingdom in the West after his reforms are implemented. Jesus is a literal real person who was bestowed with miracles including the ability to raise the dead. He will return to earth after his descent from the seventh heaven in space according to Sunni Islam as well as Christianity.

If you choose to participate in your democracy, cast your vote for the best candidate.

Primary Documents – Proclamation of the Ulema Regarding Independence from Turkey, March 1917

image

On 27 June 1916 Sharif Hussein bin Ali, Emir of Mecca, issued a proclamation in which he announced himself, as a direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammed ﷺ as the true leader of the Islamic faith.  In this he was effectively seeking to depose Ottoman Sultan Mehmed Vas spiritual leader, whom he represented as a mere tool of the Young Turk administration.

Numerous reasons were cited to support Hussein’s claim, not least of which was the alleged mistreatment by the Turks of Arabs in Syria, and the controversial argument put forward by the Young Turks (in 1909) that all religions were to be regarded as equal.

Hussein’s objective in initiating the Great Arab Revolt was to establish a single independent and unified Arab state stretching from Aleppo (Syria) to Aden (Yemen), based on the ancient traditions and culture of the Arab people, the upholding of Islamic ideals and the full protection and inclusion of ethnic religious minorities.

Click here to read the text of King Hussein’s 27 June 1916 proclamation.  Reproduced below is the text of the March 1917 proclamation issued by the Ulema (body of priests of Mecca) providing crucial support to Hussein.

Proclamation by the Ulema, March 1917

In the Name of Allah the Merciful.

Proclamation to the Faithful.

We, the elders and lawyers of the House of God, are among those whom God has permitted to serve the faith and defend its truths.  The world and its treasures, in comparison with truth, are not worth the wing of an insect, for there is no other purpose for man in this life except to prepare for eternity.

The Moslem soul rejoices in beholding the Grand “Kaaba” in the first streak of dawn and in the shadow of evening, and he is sanctified by dwelling in the land blessed by the Prophet of God.  The peace of God be upon him!  Can such a man allow his faith to be scorned or see evil befall the things that are holy?  Even so it is with us who dwell in this holy place.

We have discerned the hearts of the usurpers of Osman’s empire.  We have learned their evil purpose with regard to our faith, we have beheld their crimes and wickedness in this our holy land, and our faith has shown us the path of salvation, and in its name we have acted according to our duty to ourselves and the Moslems of the world.

Every Moslem who would consider this matter should seek its cause and ascertain the nature of evil against which we rose in arms, when we found words were of no avail.

As for us, we are absolutely certain that the secret committee of the Young Turk Party has notoriously disobeyed God.  No words stayed their hand from crime, and no opposition prevented the evil consequences of their actions.  Let no one think that we speak vain things.  There stand the facts and events which every man by inquiry can ascertain for himself.

We shall bring forth these facts and lay them before the Mohammedan world when necessity demands.  Now we content ourselves with begging those of our brethren who oppose us to send some reliable person or persons to Constantinople, the capital of the Unionists, and there witness personally, as we have ourselves witnessed, Moslem women employed by the Government and exposed in public places unveiled before men of strange nations.

What do our true Moslem brethren who oppose us in haste think of this matter, an example of an evil that will greatly injure us if it increases and of which we publicly complain?

Would the obedience of people who do such a thing (and it is the least of their crimes against Islam and Moslems) be a true obedience or would it be disobedience to God?  Never, by the God of the “Kaaba,” never.  To obey them is to disobey God.  Far from it that any of the faithful should consent to this.

We endeavoured to please God and avoid a rebellion so long as it was possible.  We rebelled in order to please God, and He gave us victory and stood by us in support of His law and religion, and in accordance with a wisdom known to Him which would lead to the uplifting of this people.

Every Moslem heart in the Ottoman Empire, even among the Turks in Anatolia and among the members of the Turkish royal family in the palaces, prays God for our success, and God always answers the prayers of the oppressed and the righteous.

There is no doubt about it, that if the inhabitants of those countries which the Unionists have lost through their alliance with Germany in this war had revolted against those oppressors, just as we did, they would have no more been regarded as belligerents and would thus have saved their countries for themselves.  But if things should continue as they are, no territory will remain for this empire.

If you keep this in mind and remember what the Indian paper Mashrek wrote on September 12th and 19th on the subject of the disqualification of the Beni Osman to be the Caliphs of Islam, you will understand that we have risen in order to avert these dangers and to put the Islamic rule on a firm foundation of true civilization according to the noble dictates of our religion.

If our revolution were only to preserve the integrity of our country and to save it from what has befallen other Islamic countries, it is enough, and we are amply justified.

We call the attention of those who oppose us to the necessity of saving the other countries from the calamities into which their inhabitants have fallen and to deliver them from the destruction and ruin into which those criminal hands are dragging them, if any true religious enthusiasm is left at all.

We have done what we ought to do.  We have cleansed our country from the germs of atheism and evil.  The best course for those Moslems who still side with and defend this notorious gang of Unionists, is to submit to the will of God before their tongues, hands, and feet give witness against them.

It is a great mistake to suppose that in rising against this party we are rising against a legitimate Caliph possessing all the legal or, at least, some of the conditions qualifying him to be such.

What does the Mohammedan world say of the Beni Osman who pretend to be Caliphs of Islam, while for many years they were like puppets in the hands of the Janissaries; tossed about, dethroned, and killed by them, in a manner contrary to the laws and doctrines established in the books of religion on the accession and dethronement of Caliphs – which facts are recorded in their history?

History is now repeating itself.  To those Janissaries, grandsons have appeared in these days who are repeating the acts enacted in the days of Abdul Aziz, Murad, and Abdul Hamid.  The murder of Yussuf Izzedin, the Turkish heir apparent, is too recent to be forgotten.

Those who oppose us and side with the Beni Osman should do one of two things: (1) Consider the Janissaries and their grandsons as the final authority on the question of the Caliphate, which we do not think any reasonable man would do, because it is against the laws of religion; or (2) consider those Janissaries and their grandsons as void of authority on the Caliphate question, in which case we should ask them, “What is the Caliphate and what are its conditions?”

Therefore, it remains for those who oppose us to repent, to come to their senses and unite with us in appealing to the Moslem world to use all effective measures for the strengthening of Islam and the restoring of its glory.

We want those who are present here to tell you who are far away that we shall confess before Almighty God, on the last day, that today we do not know of any Moslem ruler more righteous and fearing God than the son of His Prophet who is now on the throne of the Arab country.

We do not know any one more zealous than he in religion, more observant of the law of God in words and deeds, and more capable of managing our affairs in such a way as would please God.  The people of the Holy Land have proclaimed him their King simply because, in so doing, they would be serving their religion and country.

As to the question of the Caliphate, in spite of all that is known of the deplorable condition in which it is situated at the present moment, we have not interfered with it at all and it will remain as it is pending the final decision of the whole Mohammedan world.

Salams to all who hear what is said and believe the good in it.  May God lead us all into the path of right.

Source: Source Records of the Great War, Vol. IV, ed. Charles F. Horne, National Alumni 1923

The Three Central Ideas That Define Today’s Middle East by Sayyid Amiruddin

image

There are three ideas which define and defined the Middle East and each of these three has two conflicting ideas within it designed to keep the region destabilized:

1. Zionism/Pan-Zionism: Jewish and Christian Zionism. It was the inspiration behind both modern Zionism which led to the forming of the Jewish State in 1948 through terrorism against the British Mandate as well as Britian and France’s Sykes Pikot betrayal/agreement and the Balfour Declaration. The British Parliament, not monarchy, and the French republic advocate belief in Anglo-Israelism and Franco-Israelism. Christian-Zionism is the dominant political view in Western democracies due to Christian dispensationalism theology , while Jewish-Zionism the trend in the Jewish State.

Both groups envision a unique pan-Zionist state under their individual Messiahs (Jesus and the Jewish Messiah) in the Middle East and seek to erase Arab presence totally from the Middle East as they did to the Native Americans in North America. The West’s blind support for Israel fueled by dispensationalism theology of its own suited radical ‘Christian-Mullahs’, America’s historic demonization of Arabs in Hollywood, continued Gulf Wars and now open arming of terrorists demonstrates this clearly.

Both groups advocate a misappropriated and corrupted/racist form of the Arab polygenism (multiple Adams) philosophy of Ibn Wahshiyya and yet ironically do not believe Arabs are Adamic peoples. They accordingly refer to Arabs as “Savages” in their media as they did in the past with other groups and even when sending aid to Syria, perfer Kurds to Arabs.

Jewish Zionists hate Jesus and are vehemently anti-Christ while the Christian Zionists are vehemently anti-Semitic, hence the migration of Ashkenazi European Jews to the Arab Middle East

2. Pan-Islamism: This technically began with the Abbasid revolt against the Umayyad kings with the aid of non-Arab Islamic mercenaries from Khorasan. It developed during the Abbasid era with the evolution of various schools of Fiqh etc., and evolved with the rise of the Ottoman Turks and Ayyubids. Other post-Ottoman and post-Ayyubid forms of pan-Islamism grew into terrorist and other movements like the Ikhwan and Al Qaeda and Daesh.

There are both Shia and Sunni versions of this ideology. Today, Iran leads the Shia pan-Islamism front while Pakistan (Afghan war time, Taliban connection/shelter to Al Qaeda etc.,) and more so Turkey under Erdogan now lead the Sunni republic front. The Turks under Erdogan are now infamous for supporting Daesh, and the Muslim Brotherhood among others, but the real leader of pan-Islamism among the Sunni Arabs is infact none other than the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The Sauds did not subscribe to the idea of pan-Arabism, instead they made an agreement with the Ikhwan of Najd, adopted Wahhabism, and have spread pan-Islamism globally since their founding.

The Kharijites were the first pan-Islamists.

The Deobandis and the Pakistanis became allies with the pan-Islamist Sauds in the past in the East for this agenda. The Pakistanis adopted pan-Islamism after ending their monarchy in 1956 and becoming an “Islamic Republic”, while the pioneers of the Deobandi movement fully merged with pan-Islamism after the complete political and cultural abolishment of the Mughal Empire by the British Raj. Now, even most Sufi minded ulema have turned to pan-Islamism, only with a different interpretation of the faith. Pan-Islamism is no longer exclusive to the Deobandi and neo-Wahhabi Sunnis, rather even Sufi minded Sunni religious leaders have also adopted it, whether knowingly or unknowingly.

Following the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, the Sauds started trying to distance themselves from pan-Islamism. However, if the kingdom divorces pan-Islamism, without Arabism, the kingdom is without direction, as we are seeing in its Yemen conflict, and the unwillingness of Saudi soldiers to sacrifice their lives for the House of Saud and not pan-Islamism, could ideologically collapse the kingdom, or make it ripe for the US Christian-Zionist backed, destabalizing ‘Arab Spring’ pro-democracy movements like in other Arab countries of recent

3. Pan-Arabism: Technically part of the Prophetic mission and rise of the religion Islam itself, given the first Muslims and first members of the “Ummah” or nation (“Khayra Ummatin”) were the Children of Ishmael, or Arabs. Early Islam was predicated upon the central idea that the Covenant of Abraham was fulfilled in Ishmael and his descendants the Arabs, the nobles from among whom were the Lords of the Quraysh (Sadaat Quraysh), who would later claim divine right at the Saqifah. Individual conversions among the first generation like that of Bilal the Ethiopian or Salman the Persian cannot be counted as a nation for obvious reasons. With the end of the Abbasid caliphate in 1258, and the rise of the non-Arab Turks who created the Ottoman Empire and claimed the caliphate in 1519, pan-Arabism was replaced by pan-Islamism.

With the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1924, Sharif Hussein revived pan-Arabism and established a pan-Arab caliphate, one borderless Arab kingdom, which included Makkah, Madinah, the entire Hejaz, Al Aqsa, Syria, Lebanon, and all of the holy sites in Najaf, Karbala, Kazimiyya, Askariyya, Baghdad, and the whole of Iraq, all united under one descendant of the Prophet, who was also the declared King of the Arabs and Caliph. The British and French Christian Zionists deemed Sharif Hussein a greater threat than the Jewish-Zionist terrorists who wanted a Jewish State and were attacking the British Mandate witb terrorism, so they sided with the Jewish Zionists, gave them a State, and financed and armed the House of Saud and their Wahhabi pan-Islamism forces to drive out the Sharif who refused to spill Arab blood. Following this, the pan-Arab kingdom vision of Sharif Hussein was lost in history. Sharif Hussein’s pan-Arabism was based on a model of a religiously backed monarchy and Arab caliphate.

In order to further erase from the memory of the Arabs the lure of Sharif Hussein’s idea, Russian communists gradually entered the Middle East. A new breed of communist backed pan-Arabism was created, which disregarded Islam, culture, monarchy and the caliphate all together. The leaders of this version of Arab nationalism were all dictators. Nasser of Egypt, Saddam Hussein and his predecessors of Iraq, Qaddafi of Libya, and the leaders of most non-monarchy Arab republics come into this category. Their actions and disregard of Arab religious sentiment resulted in the unprecedented and phenomenal rise of pan-Islamism in the region.

The Spectrum of Muslim Political Opinion By Sayyid Amiruddin

image

An analysis of the spectrum of Muslim political opinions among in the West and abroad. 

1. Democracy (“Full” or “Flawed” as per the Democracy Index 2012)

2. Caliphate: There are only three possibilities here:
A. Islamist
B. Jihadist
C. Monarchism and Monarchist

3. Islamist with democracy (i.e. Turkish government, Hamas, Hizbollah, Morsi)

4. Islamist by any means necessary i.e. sympathetic or favorable to “Jihadism”

5. Wiliyat i-Faqih (Iranian State ideology but not limited to Shiites. Most followers of classical Sunni Islam, non-Wahhabi, actually believe in this, and see Ulema and Islamic Shaykhs as possessing the solution to all social dilemmas.  The idea of Al Abdaal is different, since the forty Abdaal are substitutes for the Caliph of God, the Imam, who is like the Caliph of God from the Quran, King David)

6. Monarchist (support for a specific royal house i.e. House of Osman ‘Ottomanism’)

7. Monarchism (support for monarchies in general, opposite of democracy)

8. Absolute Monarchy (i.e. Brunei, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Vatican City)

9. Constitutional Monarchy as Ceremonial (i.e. UK, Canada)

10. Constitutional Monarchy as Executive (i.e. Monaco, Morocco, Jordan, Malaysia, United Arab Emirates)

11. Nothing. Apolitical. According to Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, over 670 million Muslims expect Mahdi and Jesus to appear before 2050.

12. Aspiring Jihadist / Terrorist. Radicalized through the ‘Four Stages of Radicalization’.

13. Mindless. Believe in whatever the mainstream political philosophy of the country they reside in adheres to. If American, full democracy, if Canadian, ceremonial constitutional monarchy, etc.,.

14. Hypocrite. Support or praise tyrants like Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Assad, Mubarak, or Islamist-terrorist groups like Al Qaeda, Taliban, Daesh, etc., but are not themselves willing to live under them nor want their relatives to. There is nothing else.

Message to the Noble Arab and Muslim Peoples by Sayyid Amiruddin

image

His Exalted Highness Sayyid Hussein bin Ali, GCB, the Sharif of Mecca, and Emir of Mecca (1908-1917), King of the Hejaz, and King of the Arabs, the last Caliph of the Arab and Muslim world after the Ottomans caliphate was abolished in Istanbul.

*This sohbet was intentionally not edited and kept 'as is' in its oroginal message form

Bismillahir Rahmanir Rahim

This is addressed to the Arab and Muslim world who are victimized the most by pan-Islamist terrorism, more so than all Western countries combined and more. Irrespective of how evil and vile, we have to accept that terrorism in the Arab and Muslim world is not but a form of response to political and religiously motivated grievances. We need to address the source of these grievances of the pan-Islamists who engage in direct terrorism or its proliferation through extremist ideology marketed to our youth. Counter-terrorism and counter-radicalization in the “Islamist” context needs/requires Arabs and Muslims be presented an alternative political narrative to Daesh, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Hamas, Ikhwan, Lashkar e-Tayyiba, the Mahdi Army, etc., which addresses the same base political grievances. Democracy has destroyed the Arab nation and weakened Arab armies, like we saw in Iraq. Hence, those working in counter-radicalization in the Arab nation must identify what the relevant political counter-narrative will be based on the culturally relevant context. Each terrorist group mentioned above, and those like them ideologically seek the fulfilment of what they understand to be a religious obligation to have one individual represent the community as a successor to the Prophet, a caliph. One cannot simply deny or be oblivious to the significance of the office of the caliphate to Sunni Arabs and Sunni Muslims both religiously and historically. The very existence of the Sunni school as an independent school from the early Hashemites and the Family of the Prophet is predicated upon the establishment of the political office of the caliphate itself based on ijma of the community excluding the Prophet’s Family. Can one simply expect the Sunni school or world – which is becoming more and more devout by the generation – to disappear or deny its own history and the existence of the historic office of the caliphate and the validity of the noble Shariah simply because racist colonial France and Britain made an agreement and then renegaded on their promise – because of greed, religious extremism and animosity – to Sharif Hussein and the Arab world after the Great Arab Revolt? The current state of counter-terrorism and counter-radicalization, which I am throughly aware of, are in my conclusion, in fact, only really effective if accompanied with denial of history and denial of basic religious obligations for the Arab and Muslim world, denial of historic reality, and a compromise on praising the noble Prophetic Shariah for Arabs and Muslims. Like we cannot allow closed minded Ulema to hijack sophisticated forms of ijtihad followed by Arab and Muslim royalty/elites, we also cannot allow terrorists to claim our Shariah and the historic office of the caliphate to themselves. This only enables anti-Arab enemies of the faith of Islam to further demonize the noble Shariah and demonize the legacy of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. Can we allow this to continue? Pan-Islamist terrorists and Islamist terrorism and its proliferation will only reach a dead end in the Arab and Muslim world with the sword/decree of a legitimate Arab caliph and monarch, a legal successor of the last established line of the historically predominantly Arab and Arabiszed caliphate. This office was last with the father of Arabism and Arab nationalism at the end of the Ottoman colonial era – Sharif Hussein – the last legitimately accepted Arab and Muslim caliph of the world in history. The caliphate was transferred from the Abbasids to the Ottomans in 1519 and from the Ottomans back to the Hashemites in 1924. The office of the Arab caliphate will be brought back irrespective of whether or not the Western world’s leaders do or do not object to its reinstating, if not in this generation, or the next, then with the Arab Mahdi. The key is to beat the terrorists, who are openly armed by the enemies of the Arabs and are busy erasing Arab history – like in the case of Palmyra – to it and ensure it takes its pre-Ottoman original Arab color instead of the pan-Islamist color Daesh and its regional supporters seek to give it. If the Arabs do not restore their caliphate, the Turks will most likely claim it again within a shorter span of time than the world expects. According to a study by Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, the equivalent of 670 million Muslims believe the Mahdi will appear in the first half of the twenty-first century. Hence a most crucial task in my view is to end once in for all the resentment of the Arab world caused by the betrayal of the British and French after the Ottomans left the Middle East and reclaim the Arab caliphate in defiance of the French and British betrayal and further end the lure used by Islamist terrorists – backed by Western arms – by bringing back an internationally recognized symbolic office of the Arab caliphate in the biological descendants and legal heirs of Sharif Hussein. This office can and will co-exist with the office of the Khadim ul-Haramayn Sharifayn and does not threaten the territorial integrity of the regional governments. Its function is to end the claim of pan-Islamist terrorists to the office of the caliphate, interpretation of the noble Shariah of the Arabs and Muslims, and end their misappropriation of the legal right to declare jihad. It is either this or an endless continued war fueled by the enemies and their weapons. They are not interested in solving the Palestinian problem, it has continued since 1948 and has spread to Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and other countries. Things will not get better until the noble Arab people take their destiny back into their own hands as they are now doing. Praises and salutations be upon the Pride of the Arabs, the Master of Creation, the Crown, Muhammad Ibn Abdullah, the one endowed with Manifest Victory (Fathan Mubina).

image

His Imperial Majesty The Caliph Abdülmecid II, The Commander of the Faithful and Shadow of God on Earth, the Last Ottoman Caliph.

Visit to Haram al-Sharif Masjid al-Aqsa Mubaraka as a Guest of H.E. President Mahmoud Abbas – Oct 2015

image

Received in Amman, Jordan by H.E Mr. Adnan Abu Alhaijaa, Ambassador of Palestine to India

The first Qibla and third most important and holiest site in Islam – Masjid Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock from where the Messenger of Allah ﷺ started his Mairaj Night Journey – share a common compound and are both part of the Haram al-Sharif in Jerusalem, Palestine. 

In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

Both sites in the Haram al-Sharif in Jerusalem have Nabatean Arab pillar motifs. The Dome of the Rock was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king ‘Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna.

Sacred Symbolism at the Dome of the Rock by Sayyid Amiruddin

“…The Dome of the Rock is one of the oldest works of Arab Muslim architecture and is a vault of symbolism.  It is located around the highest mountain/rock at the site, and the Dome of the Rock was constructed around the place of the Holy Ascension of the Messenger of  Allah  ﷺ  to the Seven Heavens through space.  It has four entrances, each symbolizing one of the four letters of the exalted and majestic Name of the Seal of Prophets ﷺ.  At the centre, above the Rock is a wooden box, encased in a marble chest, containing two hair strands from the blessed holy beard of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.  Its four entrances are surrounded by twelve mainstay pillars, symbolizing the twelve sons of Ishmael ‘alaihi salam.  Between these twelve mainstay pillars are twenty-four Nabatean motif columns.  These symbolize the twelve clans of the Sadaat Quraysh (Lords of Quraysh) and the twelve caliphs of Quraysh as stated in both Sunni and other hadiths – who are as relevant in Islam as are the twenty-four hours of the day. There are fifty-two windows in the building, each symbolizing the fifty-two weeks in the Hijri year. Some believe them to represent the fifty-two Mondays, since the Mawlid took place on a Monday, while others hold them to represent the fifty-two Fridays of the year, the day the Messenger of Allah ﷺ was said to have been conceived. Either way, know they are directly related to the Pride of the Arabs and the Choicest of the Children of Adam – the Crown of the Arabs, the Hashemite, Qurayshite from the Sons of Adnan, the Master of Arabs and Ajam (non-Arabs) Sayyidina wa Mawlana Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Alllah – Rasul Allah ﷺ. When you come here, you see first hand why the enemies of Muslims have coveted this holy site for centuries. Every Muslim must visit this holy site and not ignore it. The Night Journey of the Holy Prophet Muhammad ﷺ is the very source for all mystical doctrines of the Sufis and all the hadiths about the merits of Shaam are in fact about Jerusalem – which is Southern Shaam…”

image

At Haram al-Sharif Masjid al-Aqsa Mubaraka

image

Outside the Dome of the Rock

image

Inside the Dome of the Rock

image

Inside the Dome of the Rock

image

At the centre of the holy site where the blessed Hair Strands and Rock are located

image

Inside the Dome of the Rock touching the actual rock

image

Outside Haram al-Sharif Masjid al-Aqsa Mubaraka

image

At the entrance of Haram al-Sharif Masjid al-Aqsa Mubaraka

image

Inside Haram al-Sharif Masjid al-Aqsa Mubaraka

image

Inside Masjid Al Aqsa

image

At Bab es-Silsilah - where Al Buraq was tied to this chain

image

Inside the Church of the Holy Sepulchre - Christianity's holiest site

image

Inside the Church of the Holy Nativity - where Prophet Jesus Son of Mary was born

image

Christian art from the Church of the Holy Sepulchre - Jesus protrayed a s a non-European

image

At the Church of the Holy Sepulchre

image

With H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Al-Habbash, Chief Justice and Grand Qadi of Palestine at the Presidential palace in Ramallah.

image

Praying Fatiha at the tomb of the late President Yasser Arafat

image

Tomb of the late President Yasser Arafat

image

Visiting H.E. Mr. Tayeb Abdelrahim, General Secretary of Presidency with H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Al-Habbash, Chief Justice and Grand Qadi of Palestine

image

Concluded trip with a visit to Petra, Jordan

Canada’s Foreign Relations with the Arab and Muslim World Under Harper by Sayyid Amiruddin

image

Biard with (now) Saudi king The Custodian of the Grand Mosques His Majesty King Salman Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud

**This is simply an analysis of policy facts NOT an endorsement for Harper nor the racist Conservatives **

Did You Know?

-Irrespective of all the “religiously” and “politically” motivated “talk” about the Jewish State of Israel, historically, according to the Church of England, and since the very founding of Canada, for a country to be defined as “Israel” it must be a monarchy, and under the throne of the Canadian royal family, which in fact as a democracy, the Jewish State of Israel is NOT…
-The Conservatives under Harper demonstrated through policy they in fact seem to “like monarchy better than democracy” according to Harper critic Yves Engler
-Under Harper the Conservatives ordered portraits of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II to be put up in Canada’s overseas missions and promoted British royal visits
-Under Harper, the Conservatives reinstated “Royal” to the Canadian Air Force and the Navy’s official name
– Harper’s government spent more than an unprecedented $28 million on commemorations of a war that happened 200 years ago between Canada’s pro-monarchy legions and the American pro-democracy forces, in which Canadian forces loyal to the British monarchy burned down the White House, the Capitol, the Navy Yard, and other public buildings, in the “Burning of Washington”
-Since the “Arab Spring” democracy (chaos) struggles that began in 2011 Stephen Harper’s government openly supported kings over democracy 
-Since 2011 the Tories have publicly backed ruling royal families from Morocco to Saudi Arabia
-Under Harper they have signed (or are negotiating) ‘free’ trade agreements and foreign investment protection agreements with Jordan, Bahrain, Kuwait and Morocco — all ruled by kings
-During a trip to the Middle East, Harper’s Foreign Minister John Baird met royal officials in Jordan, Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. In praising the leadership of these countries, the minister refused to mention support for democratic struggles in these monarchies
-Baird blamed opposition to Bahrain’s 218-year monarchy on Iran and criticized the pro-democracy protesters
– Canada under Harper has supplied to the Saudi Arabian National Guard hundreds of LAV-3 and other similar vehicles 
-Under Harper, a General Dynamics factory in London, Ontario, has produced more than 1,000 Light Armoured Vehicles (LAVs) for the Saudi military
-In 2010, the visiting Saudi King His Majesty King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz established ‘the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Chair for Dialogue among Civilizations’ and donated $5.33 million dollars (SR 20 million) to the University of Toronto to fund this chair
-Canada under Harper pledged an ‘unprecedented’ $100 million in support to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to help deal with the influx of refugees from Syria
-Canada under Harper has advanced the most ambitious trade expansion plan in Canadian HISTORY lead through our trade mission to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
-Under Harper His Highness Prince Shah Karim Al Hussaini Aga Khan IV inaugurated Canada’s first Muslim heritage museum at a price tag of $300 million 
-Under Harper His Highness the Aga Khan was invited to make a historic address to both Houses of the Parliament of Canada in the House of Commons Chamber, Ottawa
-The Tories under Harper have deepened military, business and diplomatic ties with the House of Saud. At least seven Conservative ministers have visited the country, including four in one past year under Harper
– As a result of one of the visits, the RCMP will train Saudi Arabia’s police in “investigative techniques” 
-In 2011 the Conservatives approved arms export licenses worth $4 billion to Saudi Arabia
-Under Harper, Saudi students under the present government have increased their presence in Canada, and account for the fourth-highest number of international students in the country now
-Canada, under Harper, through the Malaysian state-owned enterprise Petroliam Nasional Berhad (Petronas) secured an direct investment of US$36 billion to develop shale gas assets in Canada and build a liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal for export to Asia. This accounts for the biggest EVER foreign direct investment in energy in Canada’s history! Malaysia is a Muslim feudal constitutional monarchy
– In February 2014, Stephen Harper signed the longest weapons contract in Canada’s history with Saudi Arabia
– Ottawa under Harper is contractually obliged to keep secret the details of a controversial $15-billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia – a transaction that Stephen Harper personally assured the country’s monarch will be guaranteed by the Canadian government
– Saudi Arabia is Canada’s second-largest export market for military sales
-Canada under Harper does MORE trade with an Arab Muslim absolute monarchy, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, than it does with the flawed democracy of the Jewish State of Israel, in fact, almost TWICE more!

Architectural Signatures of the Children of Ishmael by Sayyid Amiruddin

wpid-2015-10-24-20.23.50.png.png

4:54 Or are they jealous of mankind because of that which Allah of His bounty hath bestowed upon them? For We bestowed upon the descendants of Abraham the Scripture and wisdom, and We bestowed on them a mighty kingdom

“Long live those who listen to Shah Mardan.” – Mawlana Shaykh Nazim Adil al-Haqqani qadasAllahu sirrahul ‘aziz, Sept 20th, 2013

Nabatean Arab Pillar Motifs from the Dome of the Rock, Petra, Palmyra, Bosra, the Umayyad Mosque, the Great Mosque of Kairouan, the Grand Mosque of Al Azhar, to the Grand Mosques of Makkah and Madinah.  In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

Nabataean motif pillars from inside the Holy Ka'aba from the Makkah Museum, KSA

Nabataean motif pillars from inside the Holy Ka’aba from the Makkah Museum, KSA

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs from the Abbasid era at the Haram al-Sharif Grand Mosque of Makkah. Five hundred of these pillars were recently removed in the Mataf extensions by the House of Saud.

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs from the Abbasid era at the Haram al-Sharif Grand Mosque of Makkah. Five hundred of these pillars were recently removed in the Mataf extensions by the House of Saud.

wpid-11219715_1025734304146232_5290224397069371010_n.jpeg

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs from the Abbasid and later Ottoman era at the Haram al-Sharif Grand Mosque of Makkah. Five hundred of these pillars were recently removed in the Mataf extensions by the House of Saud.

Nabataean motif pillars still present inside Haramayn Sharifayn at both Makkah and Madinah.

Nabataean motif pillars still present inside Haramayn Sharifayn at both Makkah and Madinah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Nabataean inscription on the blade of the al-Battar sword of the Holy Prophet (S).

Nabataean inscription on the blade of the al-Battar sword of the Holy Prophet (S).

Nabatean pillars from Petra, Jordan. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

Nabatean pillars from Petra, Jordan. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

petra

 

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs in the interior view of the Umayyad Mosque, Damascus.

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs in the interior view of the Grand Umayyad Mosque, Damascus.

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs in the interior view of the prayer hall and Mihrab in the Great Mosque of Kairouan.

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs in the interior view of the prayer hall and Mihrab in the Great Mosque of Kairouan.

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean pillars from Petra, Jordan. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab Pillars, Bosra, Syria built by Arab kings.

image

Nabatean pillars from Petra, Jordan. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at the Haram al-Sharif Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Palestine, Jerusalem. The mosque was initially completed in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad king Abd al-Malik during the Second Fitna. The Dome of the Rock is now one of the oldest works of Muslim architecture. In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs at Palmyra, Damascus, Syria, built by the Nabatean Arab Queen Zaynab bint ‘Amr Ibn al-Arabi (Zenobia). In The Cambridge Ancient History, Nabataens mentioned by Diodorus in his retelling of events that took place in 312 BC are said to be Qedarites [Boardman et al., 1988, p. 148].

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs in the Great Mosque of Al Azhar built by the Fatimids.

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs in the Great Mosque of Al Azhar built by the Fatimids.

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs in the interior view of the prayer hall and Mihrab in the Great Mosque of Kairouan.

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs in the Great Mosque of Al Azhar built by the Fatimids.

image

Nabatean Arab pillar motifs in the interior view of the prayer hall and Mihrab in the Great Mosque of Kairouan.