Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Ever Hear Of The Achtiname of Muhammad? Is It Genuine?

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 10:32 PM
link   
So the document in question was essentially an order of protection given to the monks of Saint Catherine's Monastery, Mount Sinai by Muhammad. Not only did it offer protection, but certain other rights as well. Apparently Muhammad was fond of the monks, and after a delegation from the monastery came to ask protection granted it.

So I had never heard of this document until today, where I saw it posted on another forum. I'm wondering if anyone here is more familiar with the document, and knows how authentic it actually is. My understanding is that it is a copy. I also saw it posited that the monks may have essentially forged this thing later in order to gain protection and certain religious freedoms.

I realize the following is from Wikipedia, but it does seem to suggest the original is still around and indeed authentic unless my reading comprehension is compromised (possible I am pretty sleepy).


The original ahtiname, or order of protection, is in the Topkapi palace museum, and several certified historical copies are displayed in the library of St Catherine, some of which are witnessed by the judges of Islam to affirm historical authenticity.


The following is the English translation. It would seem many people of different faiths have forgotten about the words below.


"This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by God! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate. No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray. Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants. No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world)."


Going to be looking into it further, but figure someone here will most likely be more versed on this and point me in the right direction. Either way, I figured some people might be interested.

Wikipedia


edit on 25-9-2013 by Domo1 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 10:43 PM
link   
Interesting story Domo1, here's a pic.

and if you want to research further try this link.
St Katherine's Monastery



posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by abdel
 


Appreciate the picture and the link. I would like to hear from those outside the monastery that have either authenticated or debunked the text though.

Had you heard of this before? Did it change your opinion of Islam at all? I personally have never really had any concrete thoughts on Islam. I admit I don't know nearly enough about it, or it's followers.



posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


I just tried to google the name in question and got shut down...do you have a link?

never mind,found some sources.
edit on 24-9-2013 by SarnholeOntarable because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 12:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


It's the first time I've heard about the Ahtiname, but it doesn't surprise me at all. Islam isn't particularly violent, the main difference between the religions is that Muslims are taught not to turn the other cheek if they're attacked but throughout history there are instances that go against the present day image of Islam, Saladin's siege of Jerusalem for example where he could easily have killed thousands of Christians but instead allowed them to bribe their way out.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by SarnholeOntarable
 


I do now. Thanks for reminding me. I'm sort of awful at starting threads.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


This "Peace Treaty" has been null-and-void and negated by Allah, Muhammad, and the Muslim nation.

 


 



Abrogation, in the Qur'an, is when Allah later changes his mind, contradicts himself, or supersedes an earlier verse for a newer verse. Allah admits to abrogation in the Qur'an in verses 2:106 and 16:101.

"No compulsion in religion" was abrogated a few years later in favor of jihad against non-believers:


But then Allah's saying (There is no compulsion in religion…) was abrogated and the Prophet was commanded to fight the "People of the Book" in Suratul Tawbah”

- Tafsir Al-Wahidi



Ibn Abbas said: it was revealed with regard to a man from the tribe of Bani Salim Ibn Awf called al-Husayni whose two sons converted to Christianity but he was himself a Muslim. He told the Prophet: "Shall I force them to embrace Islam, they insist on Christianity", hence Allah revealed this verse. But, this verse was abrogated by the verse of fighting.

- Tafsir ibn Kathir



A few years after the "No compulsion in religion" verse was revealed, this is the set of verses that were revealed to abrogate/supersede it.


"1. [This is a declaration of] disassociation, from Allah and His Messenger, to those with whom you had made a treaty among the polytheists.

2. So travel freely, [O disbelievers], throughout the land [during] four months but know that you cannot cause failure to Allah and that Allah will disgrace the disbelievers.

3. And [it is] an announcement from Allah and His Messenger to the people on the day of the greater pilgrimage that Allah is disassociated from the disbelievers, and [so is] His Messenger. So if you repent, that is best for you; but if you turn away - then know that you will not cause failure to Allah . And give tidings to those who disbelieve of a painful punishment.

4. Excepted are those with whom you made a treaty among the polytheists and then they have not been deficient toward you in anything or supported anyone against you; so complete for them their treaty until their term [has ended]. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous [who fear Him].

5. And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."


- Qur'an, Suratul Tawbah, ayah 1-5 (9:1-5)


Verse 1-3 state that Allah and Muhammad are now disassociated from all non-believers.

Verse 4 says to honor the remaining treaties with non-believers only until their predetermined length has expired.

Verse 5 says to kill, enslave, and besiege all non-believers anywhere unless they become Muslim, indicated by "repent, prayer, and zakah".

 


Chapter 9 of the Qur'an contains many of the last verses to be revealed in Islam including:


"O you who have believed, fight those near to you of the disbelievers and let them find in you harshness. And know that Allah is with the righteous."

- Quran, Suratul Tawbah, ayat 123 (9:123)



"O Prophet, fight against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh upon them. And their refuge is Hell, and wretched is the destination."

- Quran, Suratul Tawbah, ayah 73 (9:73)



And a few years after this declaration of all-out jihad against non-Muslims, Muhammad gave his "Farewell Sermon" shortly before his death. In this final sermon, Muhammad states that the only superiority among mankind is religious superiority:






"All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by taqwa (piety through the obedience of Allah) and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood."






• Point:
In the Qur'an, the jihad in Surah 9 abrogates/supersedes the "no compulsion in religion" verse. Additionally, Muhammad's "Final Sermon" commands religious superiority and the separation of Muslims into "one brotherhood" separate from non-Muslims.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 01:29 AM
link   
Sad.

I would welcome you but you want to murder me.
Good luck we are better killers anyway.
That too is sad.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 01:33 AM
link   
Mohammads respect towards Christian monks is explained when you you look at it in the light of what the Koran has to say about Christians...

"...and nearest among them in love to the believers will you find those who say, 'We are Christians,' because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant" - Koran 5:82



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Sahabi
 



But then Allah's saying (There is no compulsion in religion…) was abrogated and the Prophet was commanded to fight the "People of the Book" in Suratul Tawbah”
- Tafsir Al-Wahidi


Tafsirs (exegesis) don't take precedence over the actual Koranic verses themselves.



This "Peace Treaty" has been null-and-void and negated by Allah, Muhammad, and the Muslim nation.

As for abrogation, nowhere did Mohammad himself declare that the peace treaty to protect Christians was nulled. Islam opposes Christianity theologically, in the sense Jesus is NOT God and God is not a trinity.

Then there's 5:51, which is misquoted as "proof" that Muslims can't be friends with Jews and Christians. But it refers to those particular Christians who are friends with Jews... similar to the modern Zionist-Christian alliance... that not only views Islam contemptuously, but has waged direct war on Islam. Why should Muslims take Christian and Jewish Zionists who kill Muslims as friends?

edit on 25-9-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 01:41 AM
link   

sk0rpi0n
Mohammads respect towards Christian monks is explained when you you look at it in the light of what the Koran has to say about Christians...

"...and nearest among them in love to the believers will you find those who say, 'We are Christians,' because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant" - Koran 5:82



Monks and ascetics who gave up the "worldy life" from all ideologies are protected under Islamic edicts.

However, the laypeople and civilian religious followers are not protected. Everyday Christians are not protected. Chapter 9 of the Qur'an negates all treaties, withdraws the "no compulsion is religion" edicts, and finally proclaims an all-out jihad and hostility to people of other faiths.

 


The Muslims in Southern Thailand don't give a dam about keeping monks off-limits. They attacked and beheaded several Buddhist monks.

Religion of Peace! Woot Woot!



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 



Tafsirs (exegesis) don't take precedence over the actual Koranic verses themselves.


Chronological order of Qur'an revelation does.

Historic chronology of Muhammad's life does.

A couple years after the "no compulsion in religion" edicts were proclaimed,... Muhammad changed the message of Peace and Tolerance into jihad, hostility, conversion, murder, and conquering.

The verses revealed near the end of Muhammad's life were amongst the most intolerant verses of the Qur'an ever revealed.



As for abrogation, nowhere did Mohammad himself declare that the peace treaty to protect Christians was nulled.


The chronological order of Qur'an revelation and the chronology of Muhammad's life illustrates otherwise.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Sahabi
 


Monks and ascetics who gave up the "worldy life" from all ideologies are protected under Islamic edicts.

However, the laypeople and civilian religious followers are not protected. Everyday Christians are not protected. Chapter 9 of the Qur'an negates all treaties, withdraws the "no compulsion is religion" edicts, and finally proclaims an all-out jihad and hostility to people of other faiths.


So now, only monks and ascetics are safe?
Did you abrogate your earlier statement that all treaties were completely nulled?

The Achtinate seems to include all Christians, not just the monks and ascetics.



The Muslims in Southern Thailand don't give a dam about keeping monks off-limits. They attacked and beheaded several Buddhist monks.
It wasn't too long before somebody resorted to pointing towards Islamic "terrorism" to make a case against Islam.

There are Muslims around here who drink alcohol. Exactly what Islamic teaching are they following? NONE. Because that teaching doesn't exist. These "Muslims" are acting contrary to the Koran on their own... similar to those "Muslims" in Thailand.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 



So now, only monks and ascetics are safe?


Yep. It was even a continued edict of Muhammad's first successor:


"Stop, O people, that I may give you ten rules for your guidance in the battlefield. Do not commit treachery or deviate from the right path. You must not mutilate dead bodies. Neither kill a child, nor a woman, or an aged man. Bring no harm to the trees, nor burn them with fire, especially those which are fruitful. Slay not any of the enemy's flock, save food for yourself. You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone."

Quoted by the first Khalifah Abu Bakr



 




Did you abrogate your earlier statement that all treaties were completely nulled?


No, Allah did when he revealed Chapter 9 and all of the intolerant jihad verses near Muhammad's end:


"1. [This is a declaration of] disassociation, from Allah and His Messenger, to those with whom you had made a treaty among the polytheists.

2. So travel freely, [O disbelievers], throughout the land [during] four months but know that you cannot cause failure to Allah and that Allah will disgrace the disbelievers.

3. And [it is] an announcement from Allah and His Messenger to the people on the day of the greater pilgrimage that Allah is disassociated from the disbelievers, and [so is] His Messenger. So if you repent, that is best for you; but if you turn away - then know that you will not cause failure to Allah . And give tidings to those who disbelieve of a painful punishment.

Qur'an 9:1-3



Muslims call Christians "Polytheists" because of the Trinitarian beliefs and Son of God beliefs.


 


P.S.

If Islam is so perfect, I'm still awaiting a reply from you: Islam's Incorruptible Qur'an Is Corrupt

edit on 9/25/13 by Sahabi because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 02:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Sahabi
 



Chronological order of Qur'an revelation does.
Historic chronology of Muhammad's life does.


A couple years after the "no compulsion in religion" edicts were proclaimed,... Muhammad changed the message of Peace and Tolerance into jihad, hostility, conversion, murder, and conquering.


It remains that Mohammad never mentioned that "no compulsion" was abrogated or changed.
And your'e reading things into the chronology of the Koran and Mohammads life.


No, Allah did when he revealed Chapter 9 and all of the intolerant jihad verses near Muhammad's end:


Thats your interpretation of chapter 9.

Allah Himself says about abrogat ion...

"None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: knowest thou not that Allah haath power over all things?"
- Koran 2:106


Intolerance of Christians is NOT "better or similar" to peace with Christians.



edit on 25-9-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 04:59 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 



It remains that Mohammad never mentioned that "no compulsion" was abrogated or changed.


Revealed AFTER "no compulsion in religion":


"O Prophet, fight against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh upon them. And their refuge is Hell, and wretched is the destination."

- Quran, Suratul Tawbah, ayah 73 (9:73)



"And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

- Qur'an, 9:5


We could go on and on with the verses of intolerance, forced conversion, and jihad which Muhammad proclaimed AND personally exemplified AFTER the "no compulsion" edicts. Intolerence, forced conversion, and jihad was proclaimed and enforced during the last several years of Muhammad's life, and even until his death.

Muhammad moved away from Peace after he established his stronghold in Medina, expanded his army, became battle-hardened, and increased his supplies and wealth.

The historic record clearly illustrates that Islam began with Peace, and gradually moved towards totalitarianism and military conquest.

 



And your'e reading things into the chronology of the Koran and Mohammads life.


Chronology means everything, for that is the methodology which Allah, Muhammad, and Islamic academia use for the standard of abrogation (superseding/over-ruling verses).

 



Thats your interpretation of chapter 9.


1. Please explain to me what "disassociation" means in the context (9:1):

2. Please explain to me what "treaty" means in the following context (9:1):

3. Please explain to me what "polytheists" means in this context (9:1):

4. According to Islam, when Christians believe that God is the Father, Son, Holy Spirit,... is this considered polytheism? When Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God,... is this considered polytheism?


"[This is a declaration of] disassociation, from Allah and His Messenger, to those with whom you had made a treaty among the polytheists."
- Qur'an, 9:1


 



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Other than Islamic chronologic events or the science of abrogation,....

Could it be said that the treaty Muhammad made with the Christians has been null-and-void through events such as "The Crusades"?



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 06:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Sahabi
 



Revealed AFTER "no compulsion in religion":


1. Mohammad being ordered to fight the idolaters during a war does NOT automatically equal an abrogation of "no compulsion" in religion. Or we would have read about it.

2. Islam chastises Christianity for its deification of Jesus, but nonetheless recognizes Christians as the people of the book.

3.If Mohammad was ordered to kill every single Christian, then the middle east would have become 100% Muslim within Mohammads lifetime - with no trace of Christianity. Instead we see that after 1400 years of Muslim domination of the Middle East, we still have a sizeable Christian population.

Your idea that the treaties were nulled doesn't hold water in light of this fact.



The historic record clearly illustrates that Islam began with Peace, and gradually moved towards totalitarianism and military conquest.

"Totalitarianism"? The Middle easts sizeable Christian population refutes that.
"Military conquest"? No Muslim army went to Indonesia, Africa, China etc.
edit on 25-9-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 06:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Sahabi
 




Chronology means everything, for that is the methodology which Allah, Muhammad, and Islamic academia use for the standard of abrogation (superseding/over-ruling verses).

Allah says he replaces things with something "better or similar". That is His methodology with "abrogation". Intolerance and violence is neither "similar" nor "better" as peace.

Also, Islamic academia are not a monolithic body with the same thought patterns. There's a good reason why the "no compulsion" is still held as an un-abrogated verse by Muslims. Its only those with an anti-Islam agenda who use the idea of "abrogation" to nullify 2:256.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Domo1
Had you heard of this before?

No.

Did it change your opinion of Islam at all?

No. It's still an unhealthy fabrication.

Also -

1 - It's sad that the monastery had to beg protection from Muslim attack. Those people in the monastery shouldn't have had to do that. Just the fact that they needed to shows how violent Islam was (and is) against non-dhimmi non-Muslims.

2 - And as Sahabi has shown, Islam changes on a whim. What is 'protected' (promised not to be attacked) one day will suddenly change the next and be subject to attack.

edit on 9/25/2013 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join