Chaitanya Jyothi Museum Opening, 2000
RAMANAM
In the Name of The Father, and of The Son and of The Holy Spirit, Amen.
Countrymen,
ORBIS NON SUFFICIT
SOLUS DEUS SUFFICIT
Purpose, Focus and Outcome
The purpose of this work is to support counterattack and victory over the legal warfare, cultural warfare, economic warfare and military warfare that have been mounted in the name of Islam against the world and in particular the United States of America.
The focus is on deconstructing the pivotal perversion of Islam, the cause of all the trouble, the driver of the warfare, namely, idolatry of the Koran. This idolatry, called Koranolatry, deforms Islam into Mohammedanism, or, Koranism. An even more accurate name for it is Caliphism.
The outcome sought is conceptual clarity, historical depth and terminological precision for the task of annihilating that idolatry,
The whole universe is nothing more than subsistence in the one true God, the one God who has countless names and countless forms and calls history and humanity to come home through countless religions.
Textual Criticism And Islam
The deconstruction of Koranolatry (Caliphism) turns on applying textual criticism to the Koran. Mohammedans assert that textual criticism cannot be applied to the Koran and that if it is it has no effect on Islam, the Koran or Islam’s regard for the Koran. In fact, they threaten harm to Muslims and non-Muslims who apply textual criticism to the Koran.
They are Mohammedans (Caliphists), not Muslims and they represent Mohammedanism (Caliphism), not Islam. They are idolaters, religious perverts.
Textual criticism is a set of investigational protocols and methods that are applied to any text and that developed in modern times in Germany in the late 17th and early 18th Centuries. The protocols and methods of textual criticism developed and stabilized over time into definite rubrics that conduce to accuracy, fairness and hermeneutical authenticity.
Textual criticism is the purview of professional scholars who specialize in linguistics, philology, history, anthropology, theology and several hard sciences.
Textual criticism is a multi-disciplinary effort joining these several fields of expertise to expose the origins, claims, legitimacy, authority, developments, situations in life and meanings of a text or document. Some methods of textual criticism are useful in the examination of non-literary works such as paintings, music, etc.
Textual criticism can be applied to any document whatsoever. It has been most famously applied to the Bible, starting with the German scholar and government official(1) Hermann Samuel Reimarus (1694-1768), a man of the German Enlightenment, a Christian whose theological outlook may be described as Deistic.
Following the posthumous publication of Reimarus’ textual criticism of the Bible by Lessing, his near-son-in-law, under the title Wolfenbütteler Fragmente(2), the protocols and methods of textual criticism developed broadly and cooperatively among scholars in Europe, the Americas and other regions of the Latin Church.
Textual criticism is a development of Christian Culture. No religion besides Christianity encourages its sacred literature to undergo investigation using the protocols and methods of textual criticism.
Hinduism, however, permits the periodic(3) collation, correction and general cleaning up of its sacred literature. The implication is that Hinduism recognizes that sacred literature is corrupted over time. The cleaning up is always the work of one personality who is a Sage or better.
Mohammedanism (Caliphism) is unique in forbidding textual criticism of its sacred literature and in offering harm to those who dare to do it(4). Mohammedans (Caliphists) say that the Koran and other Mohammedan central texts are the actual words of God or carry the force of those words, and therefore, they are incapable of measurement by human power, authority or ability. And any such measurement is declared blasphemy which, in Mohammedan (Caliphist) law, is a capital offense. The origins, claims, legitimacy, authority, developments and situations in life of the Koran are unavailable to investigation, on pain of death.
The meaning of the Koran is available to investigation, according to Mohammedans, but only by Mohammedan scholars and jurists certified by Mohammedan scholars and jurists. This is convenient(5).
What They Would Do And Can Not
There is a realm of spiritual life which is not open to investigation, that cannot be investigated. That is the reality of non-dualism, wherein subject and object are reunited.
When subject and object are reunited, no longer separated, investigation of either by the other is impossible because the premise of investigation is separation between a knowing subject, a knowable object and the act of knowing.
The reunion of subject and object occurs beyond the conditions of existence, beyond the fundamental subject-object split. To even talk about non-dualism makes of it an object apart from the talker and the talking. Talking about non-dualism makes one leave the reality of non-dualism for re-emergence in the dualism of reality, in the stimulus and response (in the dimensions of the inorganic and organic), the presentation and reception (in the dimension of psyche) and the theoria and praxis (in the dimension of spirit) of ordinary life and history.
When truth — which can also be designated either goodness or beauty and is always non-dualistic — is committed to thought, word or deed, it is no longer truth. It can point to truth, it can give foretastes, fragmentary anticipations of truth, but whatever is thought, said or written is inescapably bound, as by bondage, to the conditions of existence.
And in those conditions everything is available to investigation. The most abject and dangerous ignorance is that which calls ultimate some corner of ordinary existence and declares it off limits to investigation. Declaring that which is not ultimate ultimate is idolatry. Idolatry is taking some corner of life, some bauble of history, and calling it non-dualistic, God.
nescit vox missa revert
a word once uttered cannot be recalled
The Koran is a written document with a history, bound by the conditions of existence and patently available to investigation, albeit from its jealous, demonic idolaters not without promise of harm.
Mohammedanism’s threat against any who dare subject the Koran to textual criticism demonstrates its idolatry of the Koran. Idolatry is pan-optically destructive. Every group which gets at its center the perversity of idolatry goes destructive on itself, its neighbors and its neighborhood(6). Idolatry, at root an epistemological weakness, is the chief destroyer of personality and culture.
Devotees of God neither threaten nor harm anyone because they try to estimate every subject and every object for what it really is without piling on claims for it that reach for more than what it is. No thing is ultimate. No thing is God. God is neither a being nor a thing.
To the truly great, God in the sense of some thing, some being, concept, thought or image — in other words, some object to a knowing subject — is truly dead(7). They are great because they are bereft of idolatry. They do not take what exists for more than it is. And they do not presume to threaten someone for scrutinizing any thing.
Any thing is and should be available to scrutiny and every thing should be investigated, starting with one’s own assumptions about any and every thing.
On the basis of this fundamental assumption textual criticism of first the Bible and now the Koran proceeds.
Eight Investigators
Modernly, there are Nine seminal investigators in textual criticism of the Koran and one in comparative theology of Koran and Bible:
David Samuel Margoliouth (1858 – 1940)
John Wansbrough (1928 – 2002)
Michael Cook (1940 – )
Christoph Luxenberg (pseudonym)
Ibn Warraq (pseudonym)
Gerd R. Puin (1940 – )
Keith Small (Great Britain)
Footnotes
1 All professors in Germany were government employees at that time and later.
2 English, Fragments.
3 Every few thousand years.
4 The fact that harm is offered demonstrates the demonic nature of Mohammedanism. All idolatries, in fact, are demonic phenomena.
5 It is also one claim which demonstrates that the text of the Koran is not Mohammed’s.
6 Witness the “Arab world.”
7 The god of Deism is truly dead for this reason, as Nietzsche demonstrated.
Update 1: On 20JUN14, one Raymond Ibrahim, at PJMedia(!), essayed superficially on Islam’s Protestant Reformation. I commented:
Historical, textual and form criticism of the Koran proceeds quietly and with palpable risk to life and limb. But it proceeds. These tools were applied to the Christian and Hebrew Bibles over the last nearly 300 years, since Reimarus. Probably the best work of this kind will come, as it did for Christianity and Judaism, from Germany.
This is the most powerful threat to Caliphist pretensions and its potential has triggered the several visible reactionary vectors of puritanical Caliphist violence just as did the several Enlightenments of the 18th Century, including the American one, trigger the puritanical, hateful reaction of Wahhab. USA has been at war with Wahhab’s terrorized, puritanical minions since Jefferson sent a Naval and Marine punitive expedition to the Med and Tripoli.
It is not a ten-year war. It’s a 200+-year war. Time to end that war in victory through unconditional surrender of every trouble-maker in the Middle East, Europe and the Americas. Then we can get on to the big enemy today: China.
It’s not about who is good or bad. It is about who is right and who is wrong. Puritans, purists, violent ones, are always wrong. They deserve power crashing down on them and flattening their wills to fight.
Update 2: An A-Z Guide To The New PC.
Update 3: Carbon dating of Koran fragments in England put its origin at or before Mohammed’s birth.
Update 4: An American Evangelical Pastor, Jeff Sanders, writing at PJMedia has made an excellent start comparing Bible and Koran:
Startling Similarities (and Contrasts) Between the Bible and the Quran
Six Startling Contrasts Between the Bible and the Quran
I commented twice:
Jeff, with this work you tread the specific path blazed by Reimarus in his posthumously published Fragments. Parallel and even wider paths — in text criticism of sacred literature — were trod by Jesus, Paul, Jerome, Augustine, Francis, Luther and Tillich.
As you must know, Muslim scholars disallow text criticism of the Koran on pain of death. Always have, especially after they rewrote Mohammed (mostly the second part of the Koran). In this way they made idols of both the book and the man. Thus their intemperance with respect to the same.
However, by pushing into civilization and countries developed by the Latin Church, said Muslim scholars have driven into the world’s most efficient and successful idol shredder. Did they but know it. Part of their angry posture now is conjured by their frustration at having realized their mistake … of walking into their nemesis thinking they were spreading the glory of Allah.
and:
Excellent, thanks!!! For even more extensive examinations in the same direction, by an Anglican Vicar, Linguist and Theologian, see The Rev. Dr. Mark Durie.
My own contributions to the subject is here.
Update 5: The biggest roll up of them all, if true, and I suspect it is: MBS has ordered text criticism of the Haditha. I learned of this from a commenter, James Dill, at a post by Steven Hayward at Power Line. Hayward has been following the Saudi internal cleansing for Team PL. Here are comments others made and to which I responded chasing this subject at Steven’s post:
James Dill:
Exegesis in Sunni Islam?
According to the Saudi Minister of Culture and Information Awwad Bin Saleh al-Awwad, a council of senior scholars will be established for the complex and will consist of prominent Hadith scholars in the world. They will, the UAE’s National tells us: … look to “eliminate fake and extremist texts and any texts that contradict the teachings of Islam and justify the committing of crimes, murders and terrorist acts.”
Why is this potentially such a big deal? Because the texts that they’re talking about potentially assessing as fake and eliminating are among the Ahadith (hadith).
David R, Graham:
Thank you, I had not seen this. And yes, this IS a VERY BIG deal. (Sorry, heuristic considerations drove me to the caps.)
For years I have mentioned that text criticism (of the several standard types) of Islamic literature, including Koran — and if they do Hadith, they will get to Koran, as Zafar implies, because of the logic of the effort — is the only sure way to defeat the Salafi and Shia Jihads (hegemonic puritanisms, which all puritanisms are, e.g., SJWs/Progressives/Lefties here today). So, some Sauds grasp that fact as well. This is indeed good news.
Luther’s 95 Theses rested on and invited text criticism of key Christian literature, to include the Bible. Text criticism was their engine and the engine of the Reformation. So yeah, Hayward is right, the Arabs had their Enlightenment before they had its precursor, Reformation. An irony there is that Wahhab commenced the Salafi Jihad specifically to counter the several (by country) Enlightenments in the orbit of the Latin Church.
The Bush/Obama/Brennan/Clinton/McCain/Deep State/Globalist New World Order delenda est, thanks to text criticism.
Alan Saunders:
If only the British stood by their WWI allies the Hashemites.
David R. Graham:
Alan Saunders Indeed. Both Lawrence and Allenby argued for the Hashemites. The British FO (i.e., The East India Co., who needed coaling stations along the east and west coasts of Arabia), their suspected (and actual) traitor St. John Philby (Kim’s father) and the puritan stoner Woodrow Wilson flipped British/US policy to favor sheep stealer Ibn Saud, who had sat out the war, unlike Faisal the Hashemite, who fought the war and whom Lawrence and the British Army (Allenby) supported doing so.
It was a geo-political betrayal of the first water by Wilson and the British FO. Later, the American Charles Crane, representing Standard Oil, standardized US-Saudi relations by setting up ARAMCO after oil was discovered in eastern Arabia, al Saud lands and some not, but soon to be.
Hashemites left western Arabia, moved to Iraq and Jordan, but left in western Arabia the congeniality (Mutazilite Islam) with modernity MBS is now exploiting to draw tourism there. Basically, al Saud has decided to make an effort — historically, they shun labor, prefer theft and slaves — to become self-reliant.
Amit Rege:
I hope the new Saudi rulers stop their funding of mosques and charities across the world. This will defund the radicals all over the world.
Steve Hayward:
Precisely. I’ll be looking for information about that in the coming months. It’s very high risk for the crown prince: it was the Shah’s modernizations in Iran in the 1970s that helped fuel the fundamentalist revolutions against him.
David R. Graham:
Steve Hayward modernizations were land ownership changes, deep ones, forced. White Revolution. Impacted ayatollahs, who led the counter-attack. Difference now, I think, is Saudi clergy-police also want modern world (facts), having been convinced (battlefield, al-Sisi, Trump) Salafism is a losing bet.
So, yes, key indicator will be whether or not Saudi funding of Salafi mosques/clerics around the world scales down or not. I am very glad you are on this one, probably, IMO, the single most important generative engine currently functioning. And POTUS Trump approves it.
Stuff is going on to which we, or at least I, have no access. I get the feeling things officially talked about as in the future are things about which decisions are already made and executions in train.
The world is sated with analysts.
It is desperate for craftsmen.
And by world I do not mean voters.
I mean the dimension of spirit, geist, pneuma.
If you lie, cheat or steal,
you have no prestige in this world or the next.
If you tolerate those who lie, cheat or steal,
you are condemned in this world and the next.
Update 6: The Rev. Dr. Mark Durie: Ishmael Is Not The Father Of The Arabs
Update 7: Robert Spencer: Muslim leader calls for removal of parts of Qur’an that ‘promote terrorism,’ Muslim cleric calls for his beheading
AUM NAMAH SHIVAYA
