Initially published on 18th October 2006 in Buzzle Excerpt: Focus must be made on the long fight between civilization and barbarism within Islam (a phenomenon that occurred in all milieus and environments throughout History): 1. the conflict between the Aramaeans (the indigenous nation of Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia, Southeastern Anatolia, Southwestern Iran and Persian Gulf coasts) and the nomadic, uncivilized and only superficially Islamized Arabs of Hejaz and the desert. The Aramaeans, by accepting Islam, transferred within the context of the early caliphates their civilization, knowledge and wisdom, sciences, Letters and Arts, as they were the real heirs of the Mesopotamian – Babylonian cultural and scientific achievements. It is known that Bayt al Hikmah (House of Wisdom) in Abbasid Baghdad was mainly formed out of the library, the scholars and the scientists of Sassanid Academy of Jond-e Shapur (also spelled as Gondishapur), but few are aware that the outright majority in both institutions were Aramaeans. 2. the fact that Islam's diffusion among the Arabs was rather tantamount to cultural, intellectual and religious Aramaization of the Arabs; and this is exactly the reason for which the barbarian elements of Mecca (Abu Sufyan, Abu Bakr, Omar ibn al Khattab) reacted against Islam in diverse manners. 3. the conflicts between Muslim Copts, Muslim Iranians, and Muslim Berbers with Arabs as attested in national, spiritual and intellectual polarizations of the Islamic times (examples: the Shu'ubiyah movement and their historical interpretations; the role of the Brethren of Purity in transferring within the context of Early Islam a plethora of Gnostic spiritual, moral, religious and intellectual topics; the part played by the Iranian Barmakid family in transforming the Abbasid Caliphate into an Iranian Renaissance; etc)

1. What Western Muhammad–haters
ignore!
An increasing number of un-, mis-, and disinformed Westerners fall into the
trap of the Islamic terrorists, and accept as real the erroneous portrait of
Prophet Muhammad that centuries of theological alterations have helped
produce; a false portrait that leads to Death.
How can a Western historian, specialist, intellectual, theoretician,
philosopher, ideologist, and politician fall into the trap of the Islamic
terrorists, the likes of Qaradawi, Amr Khaled, Tareq Ramadan, and Ossama
Bin Laden?
The question sounds even more reasonable, if we take into consideration the
great advance of the Western scholarship, particularly in Humanities. Yet, this
affair risks driving the West to a frontal, religious war; and this war can be
lost. This is indeed a most preoccupying issue. And its eventually unexpected
outcome could be so preposterous!
No one asks the Western countries to withdraw from a war declared against
them by the Islamic extremists and terrorists; but trying to make of Prophet
Muhammad a mischievous impostor and an uncultured thug consists in the
best guarantee of entering into an unjust war that cannot be won. We will not
get involved – in the present article – into population dynamics, although
they play a certain role, if we achieve to reach the level of 1.2 billion people
turning become suicide bombers and Death worshippers.
If irrelevant, ignorant and irresponsible people, like Robert Spencer, the
unknowledgeable compiler of a distortion entitled ‘The Truth about
Muhammad’, are not contained and marginalized, the entire western world
will be pulled into a misconceived and disastrous confrontation that would
radicalize the entire Muslim World in extremis.
We would rather focus on the historical background of the erratic author's
subject, concentrating the present analysis more onto the 'wrong' than the
'unjust' character of this sinister compilation.
Point1. The West must study in-depth, understand, rationalize,
and finally get rid of the historical burden of medievalliterature
of traditional, religious, Christian and anti-Islamic character;
indeed, this literature is abundantin Syriac, Coptic, Latin, Greek,
Armenian, Slavic, Georgian and Gueze(Abyssinian).

2. However, although this literature surely reflects Christians' feelings and ideas
about Islam before 1300 or 1000 or 700 years, it also bears witness to a tragic
lack of knowledge of the then Christian about the then Muslim world.
The fact that Pope Benedict XVI referred to Manuel II Palaeologus’ criticism of
Muhammad must not slip from our memory; in reality, the terms used by the
early 15th c. intellectual ruler of the then ailing Eastern Roman Empire are
pale if compared with those used by Syriac, Gueze, Coptic, Greek, and Latin
authors of the 7th and the 8th centuries. As early Islam appeared to the
Christian patriarchates as another Christological dispute, i.e. a kind of
extreme Nestorianism, virulent and vociferous theologians of those days felt
obliged to react and they used the entire arsenal of verbal atrocities against
Muhammad, the ostensible leader of the new, rising religious system.
What many Muslims do not realize in this regard is that the ferocity of the
attacks testifies to the vicinity of the two religions. Muhammad appeared as
the last of a long list of spiritual leaders, Christian theologians, and religious
authorities, who -like Arius, Eutyches, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Nestorius,
and many others- rejected the dictatorially imposed dogma of the
Constantinopolitan patriarchs and emperors. The threat was viewed as
originating from inside, not outside! The immediate (already in 633-639 CE)
endorsement of Islam by a significant number of Aramaeans, who constituted
the bulk of the populations living in Syria - Palestine (in the Eastern Roman
Empire) and in Mesopotamia (in the Sassanid Empire of Iran), turned the
Mecca-born religion into a theological–ideological system in the immediate
propinquity of Constantinople and Rome.
The early Islamic successes in Jerusalem, Antioch, Damascus, Edessa,
Ctesiphon, and Alexandria were perceived as an unprecedented and lethal
threat by the Constantinopolitan and the Roman establishments; in striking
difference with the cases of Arius, Nestorius, Pelagius, and so many other,
rejected and persecuted, theologians, intellectuals and philosophers, who did
not have state support (and they were therefore dealt with in a very brutal,
oppressive way), the new opposition to the established Christian dogma was
born in a territory outside the imperial control.
This is the systematically concealed but enormous difference between
Nestorius and Muhammad, as persons, and between Nestorian Christianity
and Islam, as religions:
Nestorius was born in an eastern province of the Eastern Roman Empire.
Muhammad was born in a rather insignificant, self-ruled town outside the
Roman Empire, not far from its southeastern borders.
Nestorius faced imperial opposition when preaching and exposing his beliefs.
Muhammad did not face imperial opposition when preaching.

3. The powerful Christian theological hierarchy prevailed over Nestorius
through use of imperial arms and armies, thus persecuting his numerous
followers.
The powerful Christian theological hierarchy did not even notice Muhammad
who managed only after many years to survive against fierce (local: in Mecca)
opposition and to obtain significant (regional: in Yathrib / Madina) support.
Nestorian Christianity was not allowed to be properly developed as a
theological – religious system inside the Empire and failed to finally challenge
the official Eastern Roman Empire's dogma.
Prophet's Muhammad preaching was able to be properly developed as a
theological – religious system outside the Empire and came to finally
challenge the official Eastern Roman Empire's dogma.
Where Nestorius failed inside the Eastern Roman Empire, Muhammad
succeeded outside the borders of the Empire. The prophet managed to
1- fast form a basis for significant military power (628 – in Hejaz),
2- garner remarkable socio-economic support (630 – mainly when the non-
Arab, Yemenite nations accepted Islam at a time the entire Yemen was an
Iranian province, pretty much like Hadhramaut, Mahra, Dhofar and Oman),
and
3- gain large backing within the Eastern Roman Empire through
a) the early conversions of the Aramaeans (633-639 CE), and
b) the wholehearted predilection of the Aramaeans for the new Islamic rule
and
c) the profound hatred and the outspoken rejection that the Aramaeans felt
and expressed against the loathed, theologically ominous, and militarily
oppressive Constantinople.
The patriarchs and the emperors of the 7th c. felt for the first time possible for
the Official Christianity to cease to exist. I don't discuss at this point the very
serious case of Emperor Heraclius' early acceptance of Islam, which is a vast
topic in itself. Tabari's History provides detailed accounts in this regard, and
it is nonsensical to dismiss them, particularly if we take into consideration the
extremely tormented relations between the great emperor and the duplicitous
and mendacious Constantinopolitan clergy.
The chronicles, the Eastern Roman imperial documents, the theological texts,
and the later historical sources bear witness to extreme panic and unique
desolation during the 7th and the 8th centuries. As consequence, their attacks
and insults against the leading person of the opposite doctrine turned out to
be even bitterer and more venomous than the words earlier said against
Nestorius, Theodorus of Mopsuestia, Eutyches and Arius.

4. However, Modern Europeans and Americans cannot afford to descend to the
7th c. CE; later developments and the rise of modern societies brought about a
sense of justice and equity, a truthful understanding of the catastrophic past,
and a moral responsibility for self-criticism. Today, one Christian has to admit
that the rise of Roman Christianity has been a very bloody story, involving
extensive massacres of populations rejecting the dictatorially imposed version
of Christianity, and even more massive massacres of diverse populations
rejecting Christianity altogether and sticking to their earlier religious systems
from Egypt to Gaul and from Phoenicia to Iberia.
For this reason, modern Christianity must denounce traditional, Muhammad-
hatred promoting literature that serves nothing beyond purely historical
research. This type of historical literature is totally unreliable and extremely
misleading, because it reflects a historical period that is diametrically opposed
to ours. We have nothing to gain, if we try to go back to the times when
Muslims invaders blinded the Taormina bishop and Norman invaders had
the Muslims’ hands cut off from the elbows.
Point2. The West must reconsider / reestablish its Humanities,
Orientalism, and in particular Western Islamology.
Many centuries after the Crusades failed, two Western countries (namely
France and England) mounted another scheme against Islam; this was not a
Christian scheme though. It was a purely anti-Christian attack against Islam.
The aforementioned two colonial empires, in striking contrast to Austria –
Hungary, Spain, Portugal, Germany and Russia, were established by
viciously anti-Christian forces; they were enemies of Christianity and of
Islam. After they destroyed Christianity in their lands, they wanted to destroy
Islam on the soil of Islamic Empires that they systematically tried to colonize
and dismember.
This means that there cannot be one true Christian who possibly accepts
English and French schemes against the Mughal Empire of Southern Asia,
Safavid Iran, and the Ottoman Empire, because by so doing this person ceases
to be Christian, becoming evidently an Anti-Christian.
The Satanic, Freemasonic and Zionist, Empires of France and England
attacked, detached, annexed, and disfigured (culturally, educationally,
socially, behaviourally, politically and economically) almost all the vast lands
of the Islamic Caliphate, i.e. the Ottoman Empire. To do so, they set up a vast
and complex system of disciplines within the Humanities, namely the
Orientalism. There was extreme premeditation of political nature in this
evildoing, since the target was to prove the -criminally supposed as superior-
past of the European colonial countries (idiotically thought to be related to
Rome and Greece), as the epicenter of the World History.

5. Discoveries and decipherments proved constantly and for more than 200
years the exactly opposite (namely that there was an absolutely compact and
overwhelming Oriental impact on the diffusion of civilization on the earlier
marginal and otherwise barbaric Greece and Rome), but the perpetrators of
the Orientalist falsehood did not adapt their Greco-Romano-centrist fallacies
to fresh knowledge and new data. The criminal and pathetic Academie des
Inscriptions et Belles Lettres at Paris keeps diffusing the same monstrous
compilation even today, having as emblem Athena, a late Greek copy of the
Assyrian Ishtar of Arbela and/or of the Egyptian Isis, although the Assyrian
and Egyptian models antedate the Greek by more than 2000 years!
By depriving great, ancient and noble Asiatic and African nations from their
real history, which is greater, superior, more authentic, more sophisticated,
more human, and more central to the World History (than the equally and
monstrously misinterpreted history of the Greeks and the Romans), Western
academics drove masses across the two continents to vulgar behavioral
systems, to severe psychological complex of inferiority at the national scale, to
undeserved total humiliation, and to ultimate despair. It is this explosive
amalgamation that translates to Islamic Terrorism.
Within the highly sophisticated and complex system of academic doctrines
named 'Orientalism', the case of Islamology remains the worst and the most
provocative falsification that could ever be invented as fallacy. This must not
be misunderstood; falsification does not imply only distortion of well-known
and widely accepted, obvious data.
An example of distortion is offered by the Soviet Assyriologists; they
published per year more than 200 monographs about Assyria, and all these
significant research papers focused exclusively on trade, labor conditions,
economic policies, taxation systems But unfortunately, these numerous
academic contributions never included even one academic article about
Etana, the Assyrian mythical-eschatological concept of Messiah. The vicious
distortion was premeditated, systematic and overwhelming.
Soviet Assyriology did not include even one academic article – analysis of the
Ancient Assyrian religious, messianic and eschatological references to Sin, i.e.
the Moon viewed by the Ancient Assyrians as a symbol for the Elected People
(i.e. themselves, the World History's most important nation).
Soviet Assyriology did not include even one academic article – analysis of the
Ancient Assyrian religious, cosmological and mythological references to Ut
Napishtim, i.e. the Assyrian Babylonian Noah, whose religious tradition was
transferred within, and definitely shaped, later sources, traditions and texts
within the holy books of the Ancient Hebrew religion, of Christianity and of
Islam.

6. Soviet Assyriology did not include even one academic article – analysis and
interpretation of the Ancient Assyrian mythical concept (and homonymous
epic) "The Descent of Ishtar in the Nether World"; and the examples can be
multiplied. Then, we can safely conclude that the Soviet Assyriologists
purposefully misled their audience, because they did not reveal (out of the
context of the Ancient Assyrian civilization) what was important for the
Assyrians themselves! They published only about what was important in
Ancient Assyria for the Soviet academics.
This consists in a monstrous distortion, but it is not the only! The European
and the American Orientalists proceeded in the same manner. And when it
comes to Western Islamology the distortion took the form of a systematic,
total disfigurement which is almost impossible to spot and identify. This is
due to the very subtle nature of the defacement attempted.
Western Islamology has been a pale, bogus-discipline that failed to produce
even basics! More than 200 years of Islamology were probably not enough for
the bogus-scholars of France and England (and the unfortunate, European
and American followers of them) to come up with a complete translation (in
at least one European language) of Tabari (still in use can be found the
abridged German translation of ……1877), a historian far more important for
the World History than the disreputable, racist and discriminatory, Carian,
anti-Persian agent of the Athenians, named Herodotus. An ongoing project of
English translation started in the 1980s and has not yet been completed.
Two hundred years of disreputable French and British Orientalist authority
were not enough for them to come up with at least one modern European
translation of Futuhat al Maqqiyeh of Muhyiddin Ibn Al Arabi, probably
because the Platonic dialogues and Cicero’s plagiarisms would then look of
far lower level constructions of the intellect.
Two hundred years of bogus-Humanities at the hands of French and British
pseudo-scholars were certainly not enough for them to go ahead with a
complete translation, commentary and interpretation of Masnavi-ye Ma'navi,
because it would then become very clear for modern average readership that
Jelaleddin Rumi Mevlana was superior to both, Homer and Socrates, to say
the least and that Islam is not what 7th – 8th c. Christian monks and modern
Evangelical Zionist pseudo-Christians say it is.
All this must take an immediate end and for many reasons:
a. Europeans and Americans pretend to be open to truth and fairness, justice
and knowledge. You cannot keep pretending so, while keeping under silence
the greatest masterpieces of the human intellect. You cannot claim equity and
fair judgment, if through trickeries you contribute to ignorance.

7. b. Muslims all over the world will prove to be right when accusing the West
for premeditated empathy against Islam and the peak of human intellect and
Art.
c. People all over the world, Buddhists, agnostics and atheists, will not have
any reason to believe the Western pretension of justice in fighting against
Islamic Terrorism, if unprecedented partiality and unfair treatment will
continue to be reproached to Western universities, academia and intellectuals.
3. TheWest must understand the Islamic History in depth.
As much as Western people know the Ancient Greek and Roman History, so
much they must become acquainted with Islamic History through a non-
colonial standpoint.
So, the first step in this regard is to close down the infamous Institut du
Monde Arabe which, established at the very center of the colonial historical
forgery, i.e. Paris, diffuses the criminal Pan-Arabist dogma, naming the
Islamic Art 'Arabic Art', calling the Islamic Literature 'Arabic Literature', and
denigrating the Islamic Philosophy as 'Arabic Philosophy'. With these evil
methods, the iniquitous center of pseudo-historical forgery attempts to
plunge more than 200 million of people into national disfiguration, cultural
alteration, educational deformation, total ignorance, intellectual stagnation,
antihuman barbarism, vulgar behavioral system, socioeconomic regression
and, last but not least, permanent fratricidal bloodshed.
While several petitions are already available on the web
(http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ils_n_etaient_pas_tous_arabes/signatu
res.html) against this outrageous usurpation of cultural heritage (which is
entirely due to malignant French inspiration), it is high time for all to demand
the immediate demolition of the Institut du Monde Arabe, epicenter of the
worldwide Islamic Terrorism.
The malignant French inspiration consists in true historical usurpation of
colossal dimensions, because the twin targets are
a) to dissociate a great number of highly civilized and historical nations,
namely the Aramaeans, the Copts (: Egyptians), the Berbers, the (non-Arab)
Yemenites, many Cushitic and Hamitic nations of Africa, the nations of the
Iberian Peninsula, the Persians, other Iranian nations, all the Turkic Central
Asiatic nations, the Indians, the Dravidians, and other nations of Southern
and Southeastern Asia, from the Islamic civilization (to which they all
contributed greatly), and
b) to credit the uncivilized Arabs, i.e. a marginal and historically
acknowledged as barbaric ethnic group, with all these marvelous
achievements to which they did not contribute at all.

8. This is the real dimension of the French Orientalist forgery called "Pan-
Arabism".
The second step to understand Islamic History in depth is to approach
through a revised Orientalist standpoint and view Islam as a phenomenon
coming as continuity to the Sumerian, Akkadian, Assyrian-Babylonian,
Hittite, Egyptian, Phoenician, Aramaean, Biblical, and Iranian Antiquity and
to pre-Christian and pre-Islamic monotheistic religions and theologies,
mysticisms and aniconic cults. Within the context of all the Ancient Oriental
civilizations, there were monotheistic trends, concepts and faiths that
prevailed periodically and were later transferred within the Biblical Hebrew
religion, Talmudic Judaism, and Islam. Christianity represents in this case the
prolongation of the Ancient Oriental polytheistic trends, beliefs and faiths,
involving visual representations of the divine, rituals related to the death and
the resurrection of one God, and a myriad of other seminal polytheistic
concepts.
Either the advanced but hypocritical Western academia will admit the
scholarly accessible truth about Islam, accepting publicly and finally what
they never wished to confess, namely Islam's profound Historicity, which
surpasses that of Christianity in terms of monotheistic credentials, or the
entire West will face the abominable and uncivilized face of the bogus-Islamic
terrorists, the likes of Ossama Bin Laden, Qaradawi, Amr Khaled and Ayman
Zawahri.
Understanding the Islamic History in its real dimensions is an easy task if a
scholar advances without partiality, preconceived biases, inequitable
prejudices, bigotry, and premeditated conclusions. By this, I don't mean that
Western scholars must accept Islam! Not at all! But they must demonstrate
toward this historical period the astute mind, the sharp criticism, and the
perspicacious approach that they show in other cases of historical research.
One does not ask the childish and silly false professors of Al Azhar to carry
out the task, but Western scholars can apply textual and historical criticism on
the Quran and the Hadith, on chronicles and all sorts of Islamic historical
texts, epigraphic evidence and further documentation, adding also
interdisciplinary research.
Without a jaundiced eye, one can easily dismiss any text relating to eventual
relationship between the Prophet and Abu Bakr's daughter Aisha. It is clear
that in favor of the Aisha myth, numerous hadith have been added, various
hadith have been dismissed, and even a verse was added in the Coran by the
gangsters around Abu Bakr and Omar Ibn al Khattab.
Western scholars have nothing to fear in pointing out what they would in
case the research topic concerned Caesar, Cleopatra, Octavian, Theodosius,

9. Justinian, let alone Antiochus IV Epiphanes and Alexander the Great. History
is not Politics, so that the people involved are afraid of the consequences of
their publications and speeches, and they do not say what they have in mind
or what they discovered or what conclusions they have drawn.
The early Muslim society and, in general, Hejaz at the times of Prophet
Muhammad's preaching was an environment of fierce opposition, terrible
clash, ceaseless fights, and numerous plots. This reality eclipses all other
attempts and intensions as regards a trustworthy historiography and a
plausible interpretation of the developments that the historical sources
narrate. The validity of the historical sources during a period, when
thousands of copies of manuscripts were burned or destroyed otherwise, is
irreversibly compromised, and we don't need to wait God to speak to us so
that we understand sincerely, accurately and widely.
During the last years of Prophet Muhammad's life and the subsequent
decades, among the early Islamic opposite groups, the dynamism of the
juxtaposition was enormous; the thunders emitted by the ideological
polarizations was so terrible that these conflicting groups used all types of
machinations, creating stories, destroying texts, altering words, and
modifying meanings. When we have plenty of information about numerous
cases of conflict (such as the First Fitna), we are forced to accept that the
existing narrative about a controversial topic of those days -for which there is
no opposite narrative saved- is certainly due to systematic elimination of all
opposite narratives about the said topic.
The brutal confrontations between the enlightened party of Ali and his wife
Fatima (Prophet Muhammad's daughter, who was the first Muslim woman,
the real umm al mumminin – the mother of the faithful), and the Satanic
forces of Abu Bakr, Omar ibn al Khattab, Uthman and Muawiyah, who
attempted to completely forge the real meaning of Prophet Muhammad's
preaching allow us to understand very well what happened not only after
(when they finally split) but also before the death of the Prophet. A criminal
gangster like Omar ibn al Khattab, who deliberately hit Fatima inside her
house, when she was pregnant, breaking her ribs and thus causing the death
of both, the fetus and Fatima, is not a Muslim; he was an accomplished
hypocrite and an evil person.
With today's Muslims confined to sterility and apathy, Western scholarship
must delve, without prejudice, into this subject with all the methods available
thanks to the modern discipline of History. If not for the sake of real Islam but
for their own sake, Western academia have got to set up textual and historical
criticism in Islamology, eliminating the misconceptions advanced by a poor,
low, misleading and heretic jurisprudential - theological system, namely the
bogus-school of Ahmad ibn Hanbal and the nonsensical contortions of Ibn
Taimiya.

10. 4. TheWest must identify the ideologicalorigins of the modern
Islamic Terrorists.
Instead of contributing to the anti-Western policies of the terrorists, Western
academics, intellectuals and administrations should work along with
enlightened Muslims all over the world to focalize, analyze, understand,
explain, and ultimately outmaneuver the Islamic ideological – theological
system of Ibn Taimiya that ended up as
a. the Christianized false Islam of the sheikhs (priests are prohibited in Islam
and the sheikhs have become priests),
b. the Satanic cult of death, hatred and hysteria,
c. the desolate realm of apathy and bestiality,
d. the religion of barbaric and the illiterate psychopaths who suffer from an
immense psychological complex of inferiority and extreme egopathy at the
same time.
Focus must be made on the long fight between civilization and barbarism
within Islam (a phenomenon that occurred in all milieus and environments
throughout History):
1. the conflict between the Aramaeans (the indigenous nation of Syria,
Palestine, Mesopotamia, Southeastern Anatolia, Southwestern Iran and
Persian Gulf coasts) and the nomadic, uncivilized and only superficially
Islamized Arabs of Hejaz and the desert. The Aramaeans, by accepting Islam,
transferred within the context of the early caliphates their civilization,
knowledge and wisdom, sciences, Letters and Arts, as they were the real heirs
of the Mesopotamian – Babylonian cultural and scientific achievements. It is
known that Bayt al Hikmah (House of Wisdom) in Abbasid Baghdad was
mainly formed out of the library, the scholars and the scientists of Sassanid
Academy of Jond-e Shapur (also spelled as Gondishapur), but few are aware
that the outright majority in both institutions were Aramaeans.
2. the fact that Islam's diffusion among the Arabs was rather tantamount to
cultural, intellectual and religious Aramaization of the Arabs; and this is
exactly the reason for which the barbarian elements of Mecca (Abu Sufyan,
Abu Bakr, Omar ibn al Khattab) reacted against Islam in diverse manners.
3. the conflicts between Muslim Copts, Muslim Iranians, and Muslim Berbers
with Arabs as attested in national, spiritual and intellectual polarizations of
the Islamic times (examples: the Shu'ubiyah movement and their historical
interpretations; the role of the Brethren of Purity in transferring within the
context of Early Islam a plethora of Gnostic spiritual, moral, religious and
intellectual topics; the part played by the Iranian Barmakid family in
transforming the Abbasid Caliphate into an Iranian Renaissance; etc)
4. the polarization around Spirituality and Reason within the context of the
Islamic Philosophy

11. 5. Finally, the following questions must be asked:
- How the environment that promoted people like Khawarizmi, Ibn Sina,
Ferdowsi, Maqrizi, Ibn Khaldun, Nizami, and Ulugh Beg, grandson of
Tamerlane, who was the world’s most erudite king and leading astronomer in
the mid-15th century, was left empty of intellect, spirituality, wisdom and
knowledge?
- How the Islamic world, for the sake of the heretic and evil theologies of Ibn
Hanbal and Ibn Taimiya, became totally devoid of art, literature, intuition,
thirst for exploration, innovation, genius and even commonsense within just a
period of 200 years (1550 – 1750)?
The answer to these questions will lead the West beyond the predicament of
our times: Islam vs. West.
It will testify to the diachronic reality that across the History of the Mankind
there was only one real clash, namely that between Civilization and
Barbarism.
And it will be concluded, safely enough for all, that the civilized and the
barbaric in fact cohabitated in all the empires, in all the religions, and in all
the cultures of the world.
By Prof. Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis
Published: 10/18/2006