The Kaba was built for the worship of One God. Later, the people lapsed into idolatry, and they used the Kaba as a temple. Then Abraham restored the Kaba. You would be surprised to know that the Kaba is mentioned in ancient Sanscrit works (it was a known place) as a place for the worship of One God, not many idols.
Long after Abraham, the people lapsed into idolatry again. Then Muhammad came and restored it to its original purpose.
Lat is not "Allah." Allah is the personal name of God. Lat was an idol. You and others have either confused the two names, or have perposely attempted to create a link between the two. No such link exists.
Your mention that Muhammad didn't exist is so unbelievable that I cannot express this in words. The very worst enemies and critics of Islam know he existed. In fact, when he was alive he sent letters to many kings of the earth. Those letters are located at museums around the entire earth.
Though illiterate himself, he developed a signature that is *verifiable* because it can be compared, using various letters sent to world leaders (such as the letter he sent to the Persian leader of his day inviting him to Islam).
Not only that, you seem to be totally ignorant of the hadith--a HUGE body of work that gives each and every single detail of Muhammad's life: how he brushed his teeth, how he had sex with his wife, the manner of his prayers, how he shaved, etc., etc.
These are not mythical accounts wrapped in strange mythical symbology. There would be no need for a myth-maker to include a *profuse* amount of personal detail about Muhammad's life. The worst critics of Islam have long ago admitted that Muhammad is absolutely verifiable as a being who existed.
It appears that you have some intense hatred for all religion [I suspect your parents abused you?, and are attempting to fashion your belief at any expense--even lies. And this is called "scholarship"? Fortunately, lies are always swept away.
You state: "'Women and dogs and other impure animals are not permitted to enter."
Have you no conscience? In all my travels, I have never seen such a sign on any mosque anywhere. May Allah help you. You seem to be a very angry person. That anger is affecting your morals.
Oh, my God, I've read the rest of your article. It is so incorrect as to not even warrant any serious further comment.
It appears that you are a follower of the goddess movement: a movement started by frustrated white women [more particularly, frustrated American white women. Are you American? Am I right? White women have been frustrated because of the abuse that white men heaped on them throughout the centuries.
The early church fathers (St. Cypion, St. Bonaventure, Tertullian, etc.) are the ones chiefly responsible (along with the Bible) for defining women as almost less than human. Don't blame the rest of the entire religious world for the abuse meted out by the faggot early Church Fathers who hated women (because they couldn't BE women--they were jealous fags, as some scholars now admit).
And since white men have dogged white women for so long, you are assuming that the religion of Islam holds Muslim women in the same light as white Christianity [I say "white" Christianity.
I've never seen the abuse which you goddess-women claim happens to Muslim women. My wife is as free as a bird. And though you attempted to easily dismiss the explanation offered by Muslims for the *wrong* anti-woman activity that definitely *does* exist in some Muslim countries, the fact is that it is *true* that certain anti-female activities are cultural, not Islamic. [I always notice that atheists and goddess women never like to talk about Indonesia. Why?
One example is female circumcision. Aisha, a wife of the Prophet Muhammad, stated that the prophet used to fondle her. This is clearly written in the body of works known as the hadith. Yet some Muslims today practice circumcision. The prophet did not allow such a practice.
Also, in the early days of Islam, the women were assigned *by the Prophet* to TEACH the men. Women were liberated. Yes, many men later destroyed that status, but that had nothing to do with religion. People who wish to have power don't give a damned about religion, except to use it if they can.
The absense of religion WILL NOT bring paradise for women. Look at America today. In reading Wendy Shalit's book, A Return To Modesty (1999) we discover that *despite* the fact that women have been totally liberated in America; despite the fact that "religion" is no longer "in the way," women are now MORE abused than they were before the '60s.
Gang rape and sexual abuse has risen now that religion is no longer a factor. People can find ways to abuse others, whether or not religion is here.
Let me help you with one thing, though you'll probably ignore this: You will be more effective by studying Islam thorougly and *then* criticizing it.
In a debate, you'd fall on your face even with the most ignorant Muslim. The most ignorant Muslim is VERY aware of the origins of his religion (despite what you think).
The best way to fight something is to understand it thorougly--THOROUGLY. Your knowledge is superficial and so incorrect that it is truly surprising.
If you are American, there are a good number of GOOD American Muslim men who would make an excellent companion for you. Study Islam, and you will like it (if you can first get over your hatred for your parents, white men, etc.). You would see that as Islam evolves in America, women will have the opportunity to be a strong part of that.
You will find a good husband in Islam. But you'd have to hold him to high standards.
Last, let's deal with some reality here, and you will not like my saying this: It is IMPOSSIBLE for women to establish a world culture based on the goddess.
You know that. Even if we just deal with the issue of pure physical strength, when can easily conclude that your movement will fail.
The best thing to do is to hold men to high standards. To attempt to establish a goddess world is a failed idea from the very beginning. True women don't want to be worshipped.\
I also see your goddess movement as YET ANOTHER movement that establishes WHITE WOMEN as goddesses.
They had ALREADY been established as goddesses by their men, even though the men abused them.
The men paraded them on every billboard (still do), very TV commercial, etc., every sexy calendar.
And non-white men all over the planet drool at the mouth over the white woman goddess. They showed a Taliban soldier in a mountain hide-away on 60 Minutes. He had is rifle at his side, his grenades, etc. Above him on the wall was a picture of a white woman in a bikini.
So now here YOU come re-inforcing the image of white woman as the "mother of God," right? The goddess movement is limted to white woman and a handful of African-American middle-class women who have *adopted* the white women's cause.
Why don't you just step down from the thrown you ALREADY have as a goddess, rather than *continue* trying to establish YOUR self as the perfect goddess on earth to be worshipped.
GACK!!! Doncha just love it when people accuse you of the very things they are guilty of themselves? This person comes across as being erudite and logical, but he is not rational at all. In fact, his rant is repulsive and inaccurate, containing numerous "incorrect statements," while accusing me of the same. Indeed, he continuously makes assumptions about me that are not to be found anywhere in my writing. I don't rant on and on about "non-white men drooling over white goddesses," and what does Indonesia have to do with it? "My goddess movement?" What the hell is that? It is evident this guy found an outlet to cathart deep pain, but he certainly has not presented my work accurately by any means.
Also, Allah is indeed an ARAB man. His origin is ARABIA, and he is a MALE god, created through the minds of MEN. It matters not where on Earth this god is promulgated. The demented god of the Koran is a creation of ARAB MEN. Period.
Regarding the Kaaba, pursuing his tendency to inaccuracy, while accusing me of same, he refers to a QUOTE from Barbara Walker, not me, regarding "Father Abrama" being the founder of Mecca. As far as I know that IS the tradition widely held. It matters not, since neither Abraham nor Adam are historical characters and could not have, therefore, founded anything. To say that the Kaaba was built for the One God and that the people later lapsed into "idolatry" is simply untrue. Prior to Zoroastrianism, there was polytheism in the area for millennia. Again, it matters not, however, since "idolatry" is a word dependent on cultural bigotry. It was be just as easy to say that worshippers of the "One God" are idolaters to polytheists.
"Allah" certainly is the masculinized version of "Al-Lat," the Arabian moon-god. Mr. Muslim's position is based not on fact, but on religious indoctrination, not to mention the sexism that abhors the idea of a female divinity. My assessment of his blatant misogyny and sexism becomes clear in the rest of his irrational rant and ad hominem attack on me. Where his logic fails, he must resort to assasinating my character, naturally. And because of his sexism, I will seem an easy target, one that will fall quivering at his criticism. NOT. Here's my ad hominem: bloody dweeb.
Mr. Muslim's comments regarding the historicity of Mohammed are reminiscent of those regarding Jesus. Forged correspondence from an admittedly illiterate person. And, naturally, his hysterical remarks regarding my daring to mention the doubt as to Mohammed's existence are inaccurate, since I myself did not make up the notion but quote others. Unlike his hysterical clucking, my comments are logical, considering that Mohammed's "life" is full of apocryphal tales.
And, to Mr. Muslim, your asinine comment: "I suspect your parents abused you?" is simply disgusting and vile. Have YOU no conscience? "Aisha, a wife of the Prophet Muhammad, stated that the prophet used to fondle her." Yes, and? That's a good thing? What's your point, or are you just expressing some sexual repression?
If anything, brainwashing children with this bullshit called religion, teaching them that there is some giant bogeyman in the sky watching their every move, including when they crap, piss or touch their genitals, is PURE CHILD ABUSE. It is caveman mentality at its lowest. Unfortunately, the cavemen have been able to attain literacy.
"You seem like an angry person." Again, he who smelt it, dealt it! YOU are the one angrily spewing at me, sir. And you should take a look at your own morals, that you would mindlessly believe what you do, without any concern as to the harm it does to the world, including allowing you to hatefully abuse and viciously attack feeling, breathing human beings such as me in order to defend an intangible and irrelevant concept.
"Absence of religion will not liberate women?" What an unmitigated load of garbage. You should be embarrassed. "Look at America?" America is fanatically religious, with foul organizations like the Promise Keepers teaching women to "be submissive," etc., ad nauseam. So what's your point?
"Frustrated white women?" Not only are you sexist but racist! Is this some monolithic body that you despise because you can't get none-none?
And who the hell wants a "good Muslim husband?" Give me a break! Are you living in the 12th century?
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 18:48:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Junkfood and Criminality
To: Acharya S
I know that this is a 1997 essay of yours, but I'd yet to have stumbled upon it until tonight. Three years ago, I'd certainly have been sent into snide hysterics over the idea that sugar and polysaturated fat turns people to deeds of evil, but that was three years ago.
I'm presently a reading tutor for the first grade in the Detroit Public Schools. Many of these children have been recommended for psychopathic chemical treatments for their ADD and unresponsiveness and uncontrollable natures. Truth is, these children have nothing but crap to eat -- if they eat anything at all.
That's why they're bouncing off the walls. And if they're bouncing off of the walls, they can't concentrate. If they can't concentrate, they can't do their work or learn. If they can't do that, they're punished and told that they're stupid and then they start on just that path and it's all over before it even began, fate sealed, prophecy of the inner-city criminal children in print, so it was written, so shall it be done. Screw internet access for these kids. How about a square meal instead?
Thanks for writing that.
To: Acharya S
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 00:28:26 -0600
I am interested in working for you. I am a 25 year old anthropology student, and I am largely unfulfilled with the narrow avenues in the halls of academia. I am an avid mythology, religion, and philosophy reader, and I enjoy comparing and contrasting the different motifs in myth-cycles. I stumbled onto your website and am inspired! It is very affirming to see that someone else cares enough to at least discuss alternative theories!
how can I get a job with you?
To: Acharya S
Subject: Hi Acharya!
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 21:47:28 -0500
I love your website & just ordered your new book. I can't wait to give it a read as I am interested in the history of religion (especially Christianity). Alright, screw all this religion stuff - YOU ARE HOT! Do you have time for a pen pal? I will shower you with luv & affection! I have finally come across a beautiful woman who knows more about the Homer of philosophy than the Homer of Simpson!
To: Acharya S
Subject: A humble responce to your Website
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 20:31:25 PST
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am quite certain that you recieve many emails from blind, close-minded Christians everyday concerning the content of "The Gospel according to acharya". I, on the other hand, consider myself a bit more open to other's views, and try not to condemn anyone before hearing the entire story.
I am a Christian, and if it is not too much trouble I would hope to clarify a few things that may have been confusing while doing research. I am writing to you to ask for a bit more information on the topic of cannibalism in the bible that you have presented in your website. I would like to know some of the sources that you have been quoting on the beliefs of Christianity. You mention several times that the bible is to be taken as a literal explanation of what god wants, or in your own words... " In the story of the Levite's concubine - which must be taken literally because everything in the Bible is literally true -". You stated at the bottom of the screen that you recieved your information from both the bible and from "The Bible Handbook". I am wondering how you came to the conclusion that the bible is to always be taken literally. This statement, if it has been said by a Christian or anyone else for that matter, is completely false. On another note, you have stated many times that the "all-loving God" is hateful and sadistic.
According to Genesis, humans were made in God's image. Humans are sadistic, hateful, selfish, demeaning, and unpredictable creatures, and seriously, when a child is bad, is it not customary to exact punishment? As stated before, I am certain you recieve pleanty of emails from others on this site, but I would greatly appreciate a response on these two matters. Thank you for your time.