Is Islam an indigenous Afrikan Religion and were the original Arabs/Arabians Black people?
So, before we get started let me say this. If you come to dispute what is contained in this article, here is what is required to do so. You must first have actually read it. You must also have accessed the sources and/or evidence provided.
These are the parameters that have been set and must be adhered to before we start our discussion. Here is what one must bring to any discussion such as the one we are about to have.
You should be able to provide the following to support and substantiate your assertions:
(1) Evidence. This includes quotes, video footage, articles, books, periodicals, scientifically researched studies, scientific data (numbers and percentages) i.e. Archaeology, Anthropology, Linguistics, Etymology, etc.
(2) Know the Correct definitions of the terms you are using, as well as the correct definitions of the terms being used by others.
(3) The correct timeline
(5) Statistical Data where necessary
(6) Have a working knowledge of the particular Geographical area being discussed; both in the current time, as well as in ancient time, if necessary.
(7) Do not commit, allow, nor accept deflections from the actual topic of discussion.
(8) There shouldn’t be any name-calling or hurling of insults. Name-calling and insults cannot be tolerated and only prove you have nothing of substance to offer the current discussion.
Be prepared to be challenged. If you cannot provide this type of evidence to support and substantiate your assertions, the only thing you are doing is presenting your belief. Belief is not good enough any longer. We need the facts, not emotional tirades. Facts will trump belief and faith every time. If you come to any discussion without the following above, you are completely unprepared to even be in such a discussion. So, be prepared. Do your homework first.
Be honest enough to acknowledge when you are wrong. Be honest enough to admit you don’t know something if you don’t know it. It doesn’t make you any less of a person for doing so. In fact, it makes you more of an honest person for doing so. It shows honesty and integrity in you. It proves you are willing to continue to learn and to grow, as a human being. As I like to say, “Each of us must strive for perfection in ourselves, knowing full well we, as individuals, shall never attain it. However, it is in that striving that each of us become better human beings.” None of us is correct 100% all of the time or knows everything-none of us.
Finally, if you disagree with it, you must provide actual facts and evidence that refutes it, not your beliefs or your faith. And then refute what is presented. In this discussion, beliefs and faith must give way to the facts and the evidence, regardless of how one feels about it. Here is the correct definition of the terms Belief, Faith, Conjecture, Facts, Evidence, and Refute. And, of course, you need to have a chronology–a timeline for whatever events you claim to have occurred.
- an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists:
- trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something:
|synonyms:||faith, trust, reliance, confidence, credence|
Powered by OxfordDictionaries · © Oxford University Press
- complete trust or confidence in someone or something:
|synonyms:||trust, belief, confidence, conviction, optimism,
- strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
|synonyms:||religion, church, sect, denomination, (religious) persuasion, (religious) belief, ideology, creed, teaching, doctrine|
Powered by OxfordDictionaries · © Oxford University Press
- a thing that is indisputably the case:
|synonyms:||reality, actuality, certainty, truth, verity, gospel|
Powered by OxfordDictionaries · © Oxford University Press
- the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:
|synonyms:||proof, confirmation, verification, substantiation, corroboration, affirmation, attestation|
- be or show evidence of:
|synonyms:||indicate, show, reveal, display, exhibit, manifest, testify to, confirm, prove, substantiate, endorse, bear out, evince|
Powered by OxfordDictionaries · © Oxford University Press
- prove (a statement or theory) to be wrong or false; disprove:
|synonyms:||disprove, prove wrong, prove false, debunk, discredit, invalidate, poke holes in, confute|
Powered by OxfordDictionaries · © Oxford University Press
An opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information.
- 1.1 An unproven mathematical or scientific theorem.
- 1.2mass noun (in textual criticism) the suggestion of a reading of a text not present in the original source.
speculation, surmise, fancy, notion, belief, suspicion, presumption, assumption, theory, hypothesis, postulation, suppositionidea, notion, thought, generality, generalization, theory, theorem, formula, hypothesis, speculation, supposition, presumption
Powered by OxfordDictionaries · © Oxford University Press
So, let me state this fact, so as to be crystal clear. The religion of Islam is not the original religion of the Black man because Islam is not original. Nor is Islam the natural religion of the Black man. Islam is a confluence of ideas that converged on that area we now refer to as Arabia. It is a mixture of the ancient indigenous Egyptian Spirituality and practices of Ma’at, from the Nile Valley of Afrika, the religious ideas and practices of the Babylonian Cult, Zoroastrianism from Persia, Judaism, and Christianity from the land of Canaan and Europe (Northwestern Asia) and other ideas, concepts and practices from elsewhere in Western Asia.
Here is the earliest timeline that can firmly be established for each of these Religious beliefs.
If we are going to be honest, we must discuss this issue by using the documented evidence, correct timeline and the various Dynasties starting from the beginning of this indigenous Nile Valley Afrikan Civilization, in Ta-Nehisi (Land of the Blacks) and in Ta-Seti (Land of the Bow), Nubia. It is where in the Nile Valley of Afrika, Archaeologists, Dr. Keith Steele, and Dr. Bruce Williams, of ‘The Oriental Institute of Chicago’ discovered 12 Dynasties older than the first Dynasty and Unification of Kemet in 5660 B.C.E. This proves Civilization already existed in the Nile Valley of Afrika, dating back to circa 5900 B.C.E. We can safely date the first Unification of Kemet/Ta-Merri (Land of the Beloved) to circa 5660 B.C.E. What the Kemetu/Anu also referred to as (Ta-Wii–The United Two Lands). This timeline was based on the creation of the world’s first Solar Calendar created by them in 5656 B.C.E. They discovered and firmly established that the spiritual concept of Ra, Amun, Asar, Aset, and Heru (Osiris, Isis, and Horus) and the earliest idea of a Virgin Birth, Christ-like story, evolved in Ta-Seti, at least 1,000 or more years before the 1st Dynasty was established in Kemet in 5660 B.C.E. The entire area of the Nile Valley, and in particular, Punt (Somalia) was known as Ta-Neter (The Land of the Divine Essence of Creation).
- The first references to Ra and Ma’at can safely be dated from the 2nd Dynasty (5386 B.C.E.) in ancient Kemet (Egypt) if not earlier. These concepts can also be found further up the Nile, in the rest of the Civilizations of the Valley Afrika. And these concepts were firmly established in “The Pyramid Text”, by the end of the 5th Dynasty circa 4402 B.C.E.
- The Babylonian Cult-Hammurabi Code circa 1772 B.C.
- Zoroastrianism—circa 6th Century B.C.
- Judaism-documented writings from circa 2nd Century B.C.
- Christianity- 1st Century C.E.-325 C.E. (A.D.)
- Islam 610 C.E-633 C.E. (A.D.)
I have sometimes heard Muslims say ‘Islam has always existed’ or that it is ‘the natural religion of the Black man’. My question is this: Can you provide any documented evidence that proves ‘Islam has always existed’? And can you provide any documented evidence that proves Islam is the ‘natural religion of the Black man’?
As I’ve said many times, no matter the historical topic, you must have the correct timeline when discussing History. You cannot properly discuss History without one. We’re discussing documented evidence here. So, let us begin. According to all Islamic sources (Arab and otherwise), the Prophet Muhammad Ibn Abdullah was born in 570 A.C.E. (A.D.), in the City of Mecca, Arabia. The term Islam, which means ‘Peaceful submission’, did not exist prior to 610 A.C.E. According to all Islamic scholars, the Prophet Muhammad Ibn Abdullah received the first Sur’a (Sur’a Al-Alaq 96:1) and the first ayahs (verses) of the Qur’an at the time when he reached what they refer to as ‘the age of Wisdom’ (40 years of age), during the Month of Ramadhan. That would be 610 A.C.E. Where can we find the term Islam written anywhere, on any Temple, Tomb, or Papyri prior to 610 A.C.E. (A.D.)? Where can we find the ‘Kalima Shahada’ written, carved, or painted on any Temple, Tomb, or Papyri, etc., anywhere prior to 610 A.D.
Where can we find a Qur’an written anywhere prior to 610 A.D.?
The Religion of Islam wasn’t finalized until the Prophet Muhammad Ibn Abdullah received the final Sur’a (Chapter) and ayah (verse) of the Qur’an in 23 years later, in 633 A.C.E. The last Sur’a that the Prophet received was ‘Al-Maidah’, 5th Sur’a, 3rd Ayat (5th Chapter, 3rd verse). It says in part,
“…This day have I perfected for you your religion and given you Islam as a way of life”.
The Prophet Muhammad Ibn Abdullah dies 81 or 82 days later, in 633 A.C.E. (A.D.). And in fact, the Qur’an hadn’t even been compiled into a book until the time of the 3rd Caliph, Uthman between the years of 647 A.D.- 656 A.D.
So, how could Islam have always been here, when the Qur’an says,
“This day have I perfected for you your religion and given you Islam as a way of life”?
In fact, we can say with a high degree of certainty that prior to the Arab invasion of Afrika, starting with Kemet in 640 A.D., an invasion which spread throughout all of North Afrika, the Religion of Islam never existed anywhere in Afrika. In fact, the Religion of Islam didn’t exist anywhere on this planet, including Arabia, prior to 610 A.D. We must be clear about this fact.
In addition, the first Hadiths (tales) which are supposed to be the sayings and doings of the Prophet Muhammad Ibn Abdullah weren’t collected and composed by Sahih Bukhari, into a collection of Books, known as the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad before 846 A.D.
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (Arabic: صحيح البخاري), also known as Bukhari Sharif (Arabic: بخاري شريف), is one of the Kutub al-Sittah (six major hadith collections) of Sunni Islam. These prophetic traditions, or hadith, were collected by the Muslim scholar Muhammad al-Bukhari, after being transmitted orally for generations. It was completed around 846/232 AH. Sunni Muslims view this as one of the two most trusted collections of hadith along with Sahih Muslim. Yet it is not generally considered infallible by reformers. The Arabic word Sahih translates as authentic or correct. Sahih al-Bukhari, together with Sahih Muslim is known as Sahihayn.
I am providing the definitions of the terms Islam and Allah and what these two terms mean in the Arabic language. The term Islam derives from the Arabic language. Islam derives from root of aslama “he resigned, he surrendered, he submitted,” causative conjunction of salima “he was safe,” and related to salam “peace.” Simply put, Islam means ‘Peaceful submission to the will of Allah’.
And the term, Allah does not mean ARM, LEG, LEG, HEAD. The term Allah simply means The God in Arabic. Allah is a compound word. The term Allah Broken down correctly, Al (The)+ Lah (God). Al+Lah=Allah (The God).
As is proven by the late, great, brilliant scholar, Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop, who was born in Senegal, West Afrika and who comes from an honored Muslim family there. In addition to being a Muslim Hafeez at the age of 12 (One who has memorized the entire Qur’an in Arabic and understood it), he held Doctorates in the fields of Archaeology, Anthropology, Linguistics, Etymology and was a Mathematician, Chemist, and a Nuclear Physicist. And he brought all of this skill set to his painstaking research. He had few if any Peers.
In his book entitled, “The African Origin of Civilization: Myth or Reality” pp126-127 he writes,
“…The religion was of Kushite Origin and seemed to emanate directly from the Babylonian Cult. It would remain the same until the advent of Islam. The Sabaean gods were just about the same as the Babylonians gods and all belonged to the same Kushite family of Egyptians and Phoenician deities… The only Triad revered was: Venus-Sun-Moon, as in Babylon. The Cult had a pronounced sidereal character, especially solar: they prayed to the Sun at different phases of its course. There was neither idolatry, nor images, nor priesthood. They addressed a direct invocation to the seven planets. The 30 day fasting period already existed, as in Egypt. They prayed seven times each day, with their faces turned North. These prayers to the Sun at different hours somewhat resemble Muslim prayers which take place during the same phases, but which have been reduced by the Prophet to five compulsory prayers “to relieve humanity”; the other two prayers are optional! There were also sacred springs and stones, as in Muslim times”, the well of Zem Zem, The Kaaba, a sacred stone. The Pilgrimage to Mecca already existed. The Kaaba was reputed to have been constructed by Ishmael, son of Abraham and Hagar the Egyptian (a Negro woman), historical Ancestor of Muhammad, according to Arab sources”.
Nowhere does Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop say that Muhammad himself was Black. And nowhere does he say that Abraham or Ishmael were Black people either. And that is if either Abraham and Ishmael actually existed. And there is no evidence that they did, in fact, exist. At best, based on the story, if Ishmael existed, he would have been mixed. In order to be Black, you need a Black Mother and a Black Father. And you cannot infer that the Prophet Muhammad was Black based on the quote by Diop, above.
As can clearly be seen. The religion of Islam It is not original and cannot be claimed as such by anyone. Once you add something to the original it is no longer what it was. It is no longer the original. It has become something else. The religion of Islam is nothing more than a confluence of ideas, beliefs, and practices, brought to that region by the Kushites, some stretching back thousands of years, and mixed with the religious and Cultural ideas, beliefs, and practices of those Caucasian invaders, who invaded that area. These Caucasian invaders, who invaded this region of what is now referred to as Arabia, later colonized those Kushites (Nabataeans and Sabeans) of that geographical area we now refer to as Arabia.
Another unanswered question is this. What type of documented, scientific evidence i.e. Archaeology, Anthropology, Linguistics, Etymology, etc., is being used to draw such a conclusion that the ‘original’ Arabians/Arabs were Black?
What type of documented evidence is being used to draw the conclusion that the Prophet Muhammad was Black? What document can you provide, that was written during his lifetime or shortly thereafter, where it states the Prophet Muhammad Ibn Abdullah was Black? I hope you are not relying on the book entitled, “The Glory of The Black Race over the White” (“Kitab Fakhr As-Sudan ‘Ala Al-Bidan”) by Uthman Amr Ibn Bahr Al-Jahiz, because Al-Jahiz didn’t live during the time of the Prophet Muhammad (570 A.D.-633 A.D.) and was not an eyewitness to what he or his immediate family looked like. Al-Jahiz was born in 776-868 A.D. So, Al-Jahiz never saw him either. Al-Jahiz is relying completely on second and third-hand accounts which are very questionable, at best. According to Islamic tradition, it was forbidden to make any likeness of Prophet Muhammad Ibn Abdullah.
There are no drawings, paintings, written descriptions of him during his lifetime or shortly thereafter–nothing at all. And there is nothing written from the time of the Prophet Muhammad (570-633 A.D.) by any of his contemporaries, including the 1st 4 Caliphs—Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, nor Ali Ibn Talib, his 1st cousin, describing what he looked like.
In fact, the last known descendants of the Prophet Muhammad Ibn Abdullah, who outlived him were, his 1st cousin, Ali Ibn Talib, his daughter Fatima, his wife Aisha, among several other wives, with whom he had no surviving heir, aside from his two Grandsons, Hasan and Hussein. None of the surviving members of the Prophet’s family, including his wives, lived longer than 680 A.D. His Grandson, Hussein was killed at the ‘Battle of Karbala’ in the month of Muharram 10, in the year 61 AH of the Islamic calendar (October 10, 680 AD)a in Karbala, in present-day Iraq.] The battle took place between a small group of supporters and relatives of Muhammad‘s grandson, Hussein ibn Ali, and a larger military detachment from the forces of Yazid I, the Umayyad caliph. He was killed and beheaded in the Battle of Karbala by Shimr Ibn Thil-Jawshan, along with most of his family and companions, including Husssein’s six month-old son, Ali al-Asghar, with the women and children taken as prisoners.
Al-Ḥasan ibn Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib (Arabic: الحسن ابن علي ابن أبي طالب, 624–670 CE), commonly known as Hasan or Hassan, was the eldest son of Ali and Muhammad‘s daughter Fatimah, and was the older brother of Hussein. Muslims respect him as a grandson of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad. Among Shia Muslims, Hasan is revered as the second Imam. Hasan claimed the caliphate after his father’s death, but abdicated after six or seven months to Muawiyah I, the founder of the Umayyad dynasty to end the First Fitna. Al-Hasan was known for donating to the poor, his kindness to the poor and bondmen, and for his knowledge, tolerance and bravery. For the rest of his life, Hasan lived in Medina, until he died at the age of 45 and was buried in the Jannat al-Baqi cemetery in Medina. His wife, Ja’da bint al-Ash’at, is commonly accused of having poisoned him.
So, the Prophet has no one who can legitimately claim to be his heir.
And here is more evidence proving the Arabs were not then nor now Black, here is the Prophet Muhammad Ibn Abdullah’s Last Khutba (Sermon) at Mount Arafat in 633 C.E. (A.D.). In his speech, Muhammad stated that “An Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab, nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab … a white person has no superiority over a black, nor does a black have any superiority over white except by piety and good works/deeds.”
Now, why would he differentiate between Arabs, Blacks, and whites, were Blacks and Arabs both Black?
The Historical evidence proves that the Arabs were not the first people of that geographical area now known as Arabia.
So, we must be clear, precise, and concise in the words and terminology we use.
So, let us move onto the idea of whether or not Islam is original. When one says original, it means the first, the beginning.
As an example of Kemetic (Egyptian) ideas, concepts, beliefs, and practices that were later plagiarized and found their way into much later practices in the Islamic religion.
Here are two photos, both from a Temple of the Nile Valley of Kemet (Egypt) of a Kemetu man appearing to make what Muslims refer to as sajdah (Prostration) and the other of a Muslim man making sajdah (Prostration).
There is also the practice of cleansing oneself before prayer, what Muslims refer to as Wudhu. In ancient Kemet (Egypt) it was called Ab. You can see this in “Pert-Em-Heru”. Chapter 32, Plate #125 (“The Egyptian Book of The Dead”).
The major difference is one of Culture. The original Kemetic ideas, beliefs, and practices were indigenous to the Nile Valley of Afrika and evolved from indigenous Afrikan people thousands of years ago, long before Islam came into being, let alone thought of. While Islam is not indigenous to Afrika or her people at all. Islam evolved out of what is now known as Arabia. Once the Arabs began to practice them, they would alter these ideas, concepts beliefs, and practices, that they had plagiarized while mixing other foreign ideas, beliefs, concepts, practices, etc. from elsewhere in Western Asia, and change it to suit their own Cultural tastes and needs. So, the question is how can Islam be original?
So, what we need to understand is this fact. “Religion is the deification of a Culture”– Dr. Yosef Ben Jochannan
What is Culture? Here is the correct definition of Culture.
A set of ideas, concepts, beliefs, behavior, language, and practices agreed on and adhered to by a large group of people, usually along racial and ethnic lines. It is collective in scope and practice. It is ideology, philosophy, spirituality, language, the arts, architecture, and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively, etc.
synonyms: the arts, the humanities, intellectual achievement, literature, music, painting, philosophy, the performing arts, etc. It usually manifests itself in all areas of people activity.
The Arabs have woven their own mixed Culture into the various elements of what has now become Islam.
We must go back to the original, indigenous Afrikan source and practice, which for us, is Ma’at (“Truth, Justice, Righteousness, Balance, Reciprocity, Harmony, and Order”). “The 42 Principles of Ma’at”, are written on Papyri, are found all over Kemet (Egypt). They are also painted and carved on every Temple and Tomb, found in Kemet, as well. As anyone who is honest can see, they are remarkably similar to what was written over 2,000 thousand years later in what is now known as ‘The 10 Commandments’.
This is Ma’at.
It is written in the indigenous Nile Valley language Afrikan language of MDW NTR/Remetch.
By the way, this is not a Semitic language.
The purpose of Ma’at (law/justice/truth) among the Kemet (Kmt Khemet) people of ancient Upper and Lower Egypt was to divert chaos (Isfet). In “Pert-Em-Heru”, Chapter 125 of The Papyrus of Ani .”Pert-Em-Heru” i.e. “Book of Coming Forth By Day” or “The Egyptian Book of the Dead”, as edited by E.A. Wallis Budge, as well as in “The Egyptian Book of The Dead”, as translated by Raymond Faulker on plate #36. The viewer of this hieroglyphic picture finds the petitioner led by Anubis into duat (underworld/the gate).
The 42 Divine Principles of Maat in Budge’s native English follows:
- I have not committed sin.
- I have not committed robbery with violence.
- I have not stolen.
- I have not slain men or women.
- I have not stolen food.
- I have not swindled offerings.
- I have not stolen from Neter/Netert.
- I have not told lies.
- I have not carried away food.
- I have not cursed.
- I have not closed my ears to the truth.
- I have not committed adultery.
- I have not made anyone cry.
- I have not felt sorrow without reason.
- I have not assaulted anyone.
- I am not deceitful.
- I have not stolen anyone’s land.
- I have not been an eavesdropper.
- I have not falsely accused anyone.
- I have not been angry without reason.
- I have not seduced anyone’s wife.
- I have not polluted myself.
- I have not terrorized anyone.
- I have not disobeyed the Law.
- I have not been exclusively angry.
- I have not cursed Neter/Netert.
- I have not behaved with violence.
- I have not caused a disruption of peace.
- I have not acted hastily or without thought.
- I have not overstepped my boundaries of concern.
- I have not exaggerated my words when speaking.
- I have not worked evil.
- I have not used evil thoughts, words or deeds.
- I have not polluted the water.
- I have not spoken angrily or arrogantly.
- I have not cursed anyone in thought, word or deeds.
- I have not placed myself on a pedestal.
- I have not stolen what belongs to Neter/Netert.
- I have not stolen from or disrespected the deceased.
- I have not taken food from a child.
- I have not acted with insolence.
- I have not destroyed property belonging to The Neteru
The ibis-headed Tehuti is the patron saint of Ma’at scribes and priests. He is also known as Thoth. In the Duat (place for judgment/underworld) and the Hall of Two Truths, Tehuti (Thoth) holds a tablet and writing tool and records the scale’s reading of the 42 affirmations of the petitioner. The successful petitioner will be led from Duat to Arus (the Field of Reeds) where Ausar (Osiris) sits as the last gatekeeper judge.
Another argument that many Muslims like to make is to argue that the original Arabs were Black. However, there is a major problem with such an idea.
So, in tackling the issue of whether or not the Arabs/Arabians were the original people of the land mass now known as Arabia. Let us be clear, as to the correct definition of what the term original actually means:
- present or existing from the beginning; first or earliest:
|synonyms:||indigenous, native, aboriginal, autochthonous, first, earliest, early, first,|
- created directly and personally by a particular artist; not a copy or imitation:
|synonyms:||authentic, genuine, actual, true, bona fide, kosher|
- not dependent on other people’s ideas; inventive and unusual:
|synonyms:||innovative, creative, imaginative, inventive, new, novel, fresh, refreshing, unusual,|
- something serving as a model or basis for imitations or copies:
- an eccentric or unusual person:
|synonyms:||individualist, individual, eccentric, nonconformist, free spirit, maverick, character, oddball|
Powered by OxfordDictionaries · © Oxford University Press
To reiterate. As can clearly be seen. The religion of Islam It is not original and cannot be claimed as such by anyone. Once you add something to the original it is no longer what it was. It is no longer the original. It has become something else. The religion of Islam is nothing more than a confluence of ideas, beliefs, and practices brought to that region by the Kushites, some stretching back thousands of years, and mixed with the religious and Cultural ideas, beliefs, and practices of those Caucasian invaders, who invaded that area. These Caucasian invaders, who invaded this region of what is now referred to as Arabia, later colonized those Kushites (Nabataeans and Sabeans) of that geographical area we now refer to as Arabia.
We can now move onto the idea of whether or not the Arabs are the original inhabitants of that land mass. When one says original, it means the first, the beginning. I have provided you a far more ancient name for that land mass we now refer to as Arabia. That name was Saba or Seba; A name that predates that land mass being known as Arabia by over 3,000 years or more. People are generally named after the land which they sprung. What this proves is the fact that the Arabs aren’t the original inhabitants of that land mass.
So, what is the correct timeline proving that the Arabs were originally Black? Was this land mass always referred to as Arabia? And if not, what was it originally known as? And, If there was no land mass known as Arabia before the common era and there wasn’t, how can the original people of that land mass be known as Arabs before the common era? You see, our primary disagreement of who the original Arabians are is based on the incorrect use of terminology and ignorance of the correct Historical timeline. And the correct terminology and the correct timeline are vitally important in any discussion on History. You cannot properly discuss History without using the correct timeline or using the correct terminology, where available.
To those who say the original Arabians/Arabs were Black. What evidence can you provide proving this assertion? Where is the evidence that proves they were Black? The original Arabians/Arabs are a mixed race of people and were not originally Black. Yes, the original people of that land mass were Black. There is no doubt about this fact. But those people were not known as Arabs/Arabians. They were Black people who had migrated to that peninsula from the Nile Valley of Afrika i.e. Kemet (Ta-Merri/Ta-Wii), Nubia (Ta-Seti), and Kush/Ethiopia (Ta-Nehisi), far back in the distant past. These people became known as the Midianites in the North part, Nabateans in the Central part, and as the Sabaeans in the Southern part of the land mass, of what was then known as Saba. And this was over 3,000 years ago; long before this landmass was known as Arabia. This landmass has become known as Arabia in the common era.
However, there was no such land mass known as Arabia until the common era. There was no land mass known as Arabia at the time of the 18th Century B.C.E. Therefore, there could not be any such people known as Arabians/Arabs until the common era. People are usually named after the land mass from which they sprung. As a consequence, such a claim is impossible to sustain, because that land mass wasn’t known as Arabia until the common era. It is a well-known fact that the Blacks of that region had been mixing with Caucasians, who had been invading that area since as early as the 18th Century B.C.E. They are an amalgamation of the various Blacks who had lived there and invading whites who came to settle there, and who mixed with one another over the course of several thousand years or more, up to the time of the common era. As such, there could be no people known as Arabians/Arabs before the common era, nor could there have been any land mass known or referred to as Arabia back during the 18th Century B.C.E.
The Historical evidence proves that the Arabs/Arabians were not the first or original people to inhabit that geographical area now known as Arabia. They are an amalgamation of the Blacks who had lived there and invading whites who came to settle there, and who mixed with one another, over the course of several thousand years or more, up to the time of the common era. They are an A.D. people.
And here is more evidence proving the Arabs were not then nor now Black, here is the Prophet Muhammad Ibn Abdullah’s Last Khutba (Sermon) at Mount Arafat in 633 C.E. (A.D.). It is perhaps his most noteworthy manifestation of anti-racism. In his speech, Muhammad stated that “An Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab, nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab … a white person has no superiority over a black, nor does a black have any superiority over white except by piety and good action.”
Now, why would he differentiate between Arabs, Blacks, and whites, were Blacks and Arabs both Black?
There is also these is actual paintings, as well as recreations of paintings below, from the tomb of Seti 1st of the 19th Dynastic period of Kemet, who reigned from 1450 B.C.E. to 1395 B.C.E. and from the tomb of Rameses 3rd, of the 20th Dynastic period, who reigned from 1230-1199 B.C.E. proving that the Semites (Shemahou) and the Caucasians (Tamahou) were known to them and were portrayed as being decidedly different from themselves (the Kemetu/Anu) and from their Ancestors, further up the Nile, the people of Ta-Seti (Nubia) and Ta-Nehisi (Kush/Ethiopia). This photo below, which is a recreation from the tomb of Rameses 3rd, further proves that race mixing had been going on between the original Blacks of Western Asia and the invading Caucasians from further North, in Northwestern Asia, from as early as the 18th Century B.C.E., including the geographical area that later became known as Arabia.
And surely, if the Semites of Western Asia were Black, as is claimed by many, they would have been depicted as such, by the ancient Kemetu (Egyptians). As the recreation from the tombs of both Seti 1st and Rameses 3rd proves, the Semites were not considered Black by Kemetu (Egyptians) at all.
So, what is a Semite? A Semite is any person or group of people whose primary language is a Semitic language. The term Semitic derives from the term Semi, which means part of, or half. There are several Semitic languages.
Among these Semitic languages are:
Akkadian, Amharic, Arabic, Aramaic, Canaanite, Geez, Hebrew, Nabataean, Phoenician, and Somali, and several others.
What many either don’t understand or refuse to accept because of their religious affiliation is this fact. The first people to inhabit Western Asia were from Kush in the Nile Valley of Afrika. They were Kushites. As such, their language would have been a language they brought with them from the Nile Valley of Afrika, as well. At some point in time Western Asia, starting circa 18th century B.C.E. or earlier, was invaded, gradually, and colonized by Caucasians from Northwestern Asia. This invasion went on for over several thousand years or more. Along with this invasion, miscegenation and amalgamation took place, as well. And those Blacks who remained in Western Asia are the remnants of those ancient migrations out of Afrika. As well as those who’ve been enslaved over the last millennium or so, since the advent of Islam in 633 A.D. They are nothing more than colonized Kushites who’ve adapted to colonization. As a consequence of this Colonization, Semitic language and Culture gradually came about. The result of this is a confluence of people, languages, and Cultures. It is a confluence of both Languages and Cultures of Kushites who migrated from the Nile Valley of Afrika to Western Asia in the remotest of times and those Caucasians who invaded much later from Northwestern Asia. Hence, Semitic language is the result of this admixture of languages and Cultures. This is what Semitic languages and Cultures are.
Semites, generally are a mixed race of people, representing various shades of light-skinned, to Brown, and the remnants of the earliest Blacks who lived in Western Asia. As well as those Blacks who’ve been enslaved and were taken there and who have lived there over the course of the last 1,400 years or so. Semites speak a Semitic language. In this case, they speak Arabic and practice a Semitic Culture (Afro-Arab/Islamic).
Painting/Base Relief from the tomb of Seti 1st of the 19th Dynastic period of Kemet, who reigned from 1450 B.C.E. to 1395 B.C.E.
From left to Right: Semites, Egypto-Nubians, and Caucasians
Here are 4 present-day examples of the 4 known races that the Kemetu knew of and dealt with regularly.
As you can see, the Semites do not look like us at all.
To further illustrate my point, let us go further. Here’s what Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop actually said in his book “The African Origin Of Civilization: Myth or Reality” p 124,
“This empire was destroyed in the eighteenth century B.C. by an invasion of coarse, white Jectanide tribes, who apparently came to settle there among the Blacks. Before long, however, the Kushite element regained political control and cultural control. The first White tribes were completely absorbed by the Kushites This epoch is called that of the ‘Second Adites’. Cf. Lenormant, pp. 260-261.
These facts, on which even Arab authors agree, prove, as will shortly become more evident, that the Arab race cannot be conceived as anything but a mixture of Blacks and Whites, a process continuing even today. These same facts also prove that traits common to Black culture and Semitic culture have been borrowed from Blacks. The reverse is historically false”…In the eighth century B.C., the Jectanides, having become strong enough, seized power in the exact same manner——–and during the exact same period—–as the Assyrians won control over the Babylonians (also Kushites)…”
Diop further said in his book pp127-128, “Consequently, it is important to change our notions about the Semite. Whether in Mesopotamia, Phoenicia, or Arabia, the Semite, in-so-far as he is discernible objectively, appears as a product of a Negro-White mixture. It is possible that Whites who came to crossbreed with Negroes in that area of Western Asia were distinguished by certain ethnic features, such as the Hittite nose. The mixed character of the Semitic languages could be explained the same way. Their roots are common to Arabic, Hebrew, Syriac and Germanic tongues.
Here is more evidence proving that Arabic is a Semitic language that developed outside of Afrika.
Old Arabic is the earliest attested stage of the Arabic language, beginning with the first attestation of personal names in the 9th century BC, culminating in the codification of Classical Arabic beginning in the 7th century AD. Originally the primary language of the Safaitic and Hismaic inscriptions, it came to be expressed primarily in a modified Nabataean script after the demise of the Nabataean Kingdom. In addition, inscriptions in Old Arabic are attested in the Dadanitic script and the Greek alphabet, the latter of which have proved indispensable in the reconstruction of the language’s phonology.
The earliest attestations of Arabic are personal names dating back to the Assyrian period. From the second century BC onwards, personal names are attested in Nabataean inscriptions and Nabataean Arabic substratal influence can be demonstrated in the Nabataean Aramaic. Dating to the 1st century BC, the Safaitic and Hismaic inscriptions, concentrated in Hauran and Hisma, respectively, attest to the forms of Arabic used by the nomads of those regions.
Late Antiquity saw linguistic Arabization farther afield: in Yemen in the 6th century, especially in the language of trade and among the military, and following the influence of Kindah, in Palestine, and, one would expect, in areas where Ancient North Arabian scripts were used. The Nabataean alphabet did not replace the Ancient North Arabian scripts functionally, however, and the disappearance of inscriptions in the Ancient North Arabian scripts may have had more to do with the integration of the peoples who produced them into an emerging Arab society in which the day-to-day role of these peoples had changed.
So, to reiterate, A Semite is any person or group of people whose primary language is a Semitic language. The term Semitic derives from the term Semi, which means part of, or half. There are several Semitic languages. Among these are Akkadian, Amharic, Arabic, Aramaic, Canaanite, Geez, Hebrew, Nabataean, Phoenician, Somali, and several others.
We must also consider the fact that the Arabs have proven themselves to be our mortal enemies and have been since 640 A.D., if not earlier. The proof of this is the Historical events where the Arabs invaded North Afrika starting with Kemet (Egypt) in 640 A.D. and then sweeping across all of North Afrika, all the way across to Morocco and Mauritania and down into Nubia (Sudan). For those who doubt this, I’d like you to consider this fact. In ancient times, Egypt was known as Kemet, Tunisia, and Algeria was known as Carthage. Morocco and Mauritania were known as Numidia. And Biladus-As-Sudan was known as Nubia. Only invaders change the names of the places they invade.
“The Destruction Of Black Civilization: Great Issues of A Race From 4500 B.C.–2000 A.D.” by Dr. Chancellor Williams
‘Preview’ pp. 22-23 entitled, The “White” Arabs,
He says, “The relentless searchlights of History were turned on the roles played by both Islam and Christianity in the subjugation of the Blacks. This confused many and outraged those who did not pause to distinguish evil men who use religion to disguise their real aims. The unthinking Muslim or Christian would likely believe that his religion is being attacked rather than those conquerors and enslavers who disgraced it in covering their drive for wealth and world domination. Blacks in The United States seem to be more mixed up and confused over the search for racial identity than anywhere else. Hence, many are dropping their white Slavemasters’ names and adopting, not African, but their Arab and Berber Slavemasters’ names! The confusion will continue, however, as long as the fact that millions of mulattoes in Arab countries are considered “white” is ignored along with the fact that countless unmixed sun-baked, desert-dwelling Arabs are not only brown but some very dark in color (all of this darkening of skin in spite of the ages-old tradition of the thick cloth covering the face from the scorching sun)”.
“…In studying the actual records in History of the race, therefore, the role of “white” Arabs must not be obscured either by their Islamic religion or by the presence of Africans and Afro-Arabs among them any more than we should permit white Europeans and white Americans to use Christianity to cover their drive for power and control of the lives of other people”.
“The Destruction Of Black Civilization: Great Issues of A Race From 4500 B.C.–2000 A.D.“ on page 150, Dr. Chancellor Williams says in his chapter entitled, “The Arab Hordes”
“The Treaty barring Arab settlements in the all Black Countries had been ignored almost from the beginning and certainly treated as non-existent after the death of Kalydosos. The Arabs came in steady streams, year after year…” Later, on that same page, he says, “But they came in unchecked and alarming waves when the great schisms in Islam led to bloody wars in the Arab world…Let the record show, therefore, that all of the Arabs that swarmed into Africa across the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean, were not bent on either conquest or domination. Countless thousands were fleeing there for refuge, for their very lives. Once settled there, however, they formed the ever-increasing population base for the Muslim leaders whose aim was to establish Islamic rule over the whole Black world.”
The Arabs have enslaved untold millions of Black people, over the course of 1,400 years or more and they continue doing so. Throughout the last 1,400 years or more the Arabs have been enslaving Black people. Even today you can see this fact in Southern Sudan, Darfur (Western) Sudan. And even in Libya, where the Arabs are openly selling Blacks on the open market.
How many of you are aware of “The Zanj Rebellion of 869-883 A.D.”?
“The Zanj Rebellion of 869-883 A.D.”
Here is further evidence that proves the Arabs were and are heavily involved in our enslavement.
“The Arab Muslim Slave Trade Of Africans, The Untold Story”
“Time to end Arab racism”
And there is this quote about the Arabs from Dr. Chancellor Williams, as well:
“….So, as early as the ninth century, (831 A.D.), King Zakaria, alarmed at the great incursions of Arabs into the Sudan, sent a delegation headed by his nephew (heir to the throne) to the caliph of Bagdad, asking that the Treaty of 652 be respected and Arab migrations halted. This meant a weak Black King now held the destiny of the race in his hands. That he was so naive as to suppose that the Caliph could stop the Arab hordes even if he desired to do so, it was itself a sign of incompetence”.–Dr. Chancellor Williams, “The Destruction Of Black Civilization: Great Issues of A Race From 4500 B.C.–2000 A.D.“
There is more on pp151-160
In addition, those who continue trying to advocate that Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop said that the Arabs never invaded Afrika, would do well to research what he actually said in his book entitled, “Precolonial Black Africa”. He never said that at all. In fact, Diop confirms the fact that the Arabs did invade North Afrika by ‘force of arms’. At the bottom of pp 101-102 of “Pre-colonial Black Africa”,
Diop says, “Much has been made of the Arab invasion of Africa: they occurred in the North, but in Black Africa, they are figments of the imagination. While the Arabs did conquer North Africa by force of arms, they quite peaceably entered Black Africa: the desert always served as a protective shield. From the time of the initial Umayyed setbacks in the eighth century, no Arab army ever crossed the Sahara in an attempt to conquer Africa, except for the Moroccan War of the sixteenth century.”
Perhaps, you missed the part where Diop said, ‘…While the Arabs did conquer North Africa by force of arms…’
It is obvious that those who have read this book either missed this quote entirely or omitted the part of the quote I’ve presented above, and for obvious reasons.
Now, the question is what was meant by ‘Black Afrika’ according to Diop? Keep in mind, his books were written in French, not English. Obviously, someone incorrectly translated this part to mean Black Afrika. However, any student of that History knows that he was referring to the ancient and medieval West Afrikan Civilizations of Ghana, Mali, and Songhay and the rest of Afrika, south of the Sahara. And this is what is meant by his statement that Islam was propagated peaceably in West Afrika, and not North Afrika. In North Afrika, the Arabs did conquer it and its people by force. They then enslaved many of our people there and they are still doing so. They have also have been systematically trying to destroy Black Civilization since they arrived in North Afrika. Most importantly is the fact that all of Afrika is Black Afrika, not just Afrika, south of the Sahara, including Kemet (Egypt) and the rest of the ancient Nile Valley Civilizations, as Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop tirelessly set out to prove. As the late, great, Dr. John Henrik Clarke reminds us, “All people in Afrika, who are not Afrikans (Black) are either invaders or the descendants of invaders”.
It is also obvious they’ve never read the highly researched book entitled, “The Destruction of Black Civilization: Great Issues of a Race from 4500 B.C.–2000 A.D.” by Dr. Chancellor Williams. But you sure need to do so.
So, why are we so intent on identifying with a people who do not look like us, do not want to be us, and who have proven over the course of 1,400 years that they hate us? And why do we continue to identify with these people who have proven themselves our mortal enemy over the course of 1,400 years or more? What makes us, as a race of people argue and fight so hard to be included among a people who do not want us to be included among them? We would rather spend time claiming every other race and/or group of people as being Black as if by doing so, it will empower us. Claiming the Arabs were Black or claiming we are Arabs won’t empower us at all. Such claims only make us beholden to them, their religion, and their Culture, etc., and only empowers them against us. Why not be proud of who we are—Afrikan people, and claim our own, and what is our rightful place on this planet as Afrikan people?
Below are quotes from Arab themselves and how Arabs view the Black people. And their actions collectively, towards Black people over the course of the last 1,400 years or more proves it. The Arabs are not our friends. They’ve more than proven this over the course of the last 1,400 years or more.
This is an example of the mindset of some of the most revered scholars in Islam that would eventually set the foundation for the reasoning of enslaving Black people from birth to death and making it inherited from mother to child: What the most famous Islamic scholars said about black people
“Here is what some of the most famous Islamic scholars wrote about sub-Saharan Africans. All of these men are still revered and used for Islamic study to this day.
“Merriment dominates the black man because of his defective brain, whence also the weakness of his intelligence.” – Al-Masudi (896-956), Great geographer who traveled as far as China and Sri Lanka, known as the “Herodotus of the Arabs.”
“Of the neighbors of the Bujja, Maqdisi had heard that “there is no marriage among them; the child does not know his father, and they eat people — but God knows best. As for the Zanj, they are people of black color, flat noses, kinky hair, and little understanding or intelligence.” – Al-Muqaddasi (945/946-1000).
He was a famous Arab geographer.
“[Blacks are] people who are by their very nature slaves.” – Ibn Sina AKA Avicenna (980-1037) , referred to as “The Father of Modern Medicine” by Persians. He was considered to be one of the top scholars of the Islamic Golden Age.
Nasīr al-Dīn al-Tūsī (1201-1274), Famous for both Islamic religious and scientific writings. He was considered to be the Greatest Persian mathematician and astronomer of all time. He was considered the first person to translate all the famous Greek books of Mathematics into Arabic.
“If (all types of men) are taken, from the first, and one placed after another, like the Negro from Zanzibar, in the Southern-most countries, the Negro does not differ from an animal in anything except the fact that his hands have been lifted from the earth -in no other peculiarity or property – except for what God wished. Many have seen that the ape is more capable of being trained than the Negro, and more intelligent.”
“[The Zanj (African) differ from animals only in that] their two hands are lifted above the ground,… Many have observed that the ape is more teachable and more intelligent than the Zanj.”
Ibn Khaldun (1332–1406), Andalusian Arab of Tunisian origin. Wrote the Muqaddimah, from which these quotes are taken. He was regarded by Arabs & Turks as a founding father of sociology, economics, and historiography. Currently appears on the 10 Dinar bill in Tunisia.
“Therefore, the Negro nation are, as a rule, submissive to slavery, because [Negroes] have little [that is essentially] human and have attributes that are quite similar to those of dumb animals, as we have stated.”
“Beyond [known peoples of black West Africa] to the south there is no civilization in the proper sense. There are only humans who are closer to dumb animals than to rational beings. They live in thickets and caves, and eat herbs and unprepared grain. They frequently eat each other. They cannot be considered human beings.”
To sum it up. There is no evidence one can provide proving Islam is original or that it is indigenous to Afrika or her people. Nor can anyone prove the Arabs/Arabians are the original inhabitants of what is now known as Arabia nor prove the Arabs are anything other than a mixed race of people. And they are not the original inhabitants of the land we now refer to as Arabia.
What Muslims, of all sects and persuasions, must admit is this: Your belief is nothing more than another branch of the tree of Abrahamic belief systems. And you cannot disassociate your beliefs from it. Each of these Abrahamic beliefs condemns its predecessor while borrowing heavily from it. You can mention all of the principles of Islam that you want, but at the end of the day, it’s still an Abrahamic belief. There is no getting around this fact. And if one Abrahamic faith falls, they all fall, because they are all based on the same Mythos. Go back to the original source, which is indigenous Afrikan spirituality. So, to be clear. We are not Arabs/Arabians. The Arabs/Arabians aren’t us and we aren’t them. And Islam is not an indigenous Afrikan spiritual system. Stop the madness!!! We are an Afrikan people. Go back to that which is you. We are not Arabs. We are an Afrikan people.
(1) “The African Origin of Civilization: Myth or Reality”, by Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop
(2) “Civilization of Barbarism” by Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop
(3) “The Destruction of Black Civilization: Great Issues of a Race from 4500 B.C.–2000 A.D.”, by Dr. Chancellor Williams
(4) The Egyptian Book of The Dead and the Papyrus of Ani”, as Translated by E.A. Wallis Budge
(5) “The Holy Qur’an”, as translated by Maulana Muhammad Ali
(6) “The Glory of The Black Race over the White” (“Kitab Fakhr As-Sudan ‘Ala Al-Bidan”), by Uthman Amr Ibn Bahr Al-Jahiz
(7) “Egyptian Divinities: The All Who Are The One”, by Moustafa Gadalla
(8) “The African Origin Of The Major Western Religions”, by Dr. Yosef Ben Jochannan
(9) “The Hadiths” by Sahih Bukari
(10) “African Time: Universe to 1896 A.D., vol. #1” by Tdka Maat Kilimanjaro, Ph.D., Ife Kilimanjaro, Ph.D., Yahra Aaaneb, Seba
(11) “The Arab Muslim Slave Trade Of Africans, The Untold” Story
(12) “The Zanj Rebellion of 869-883”
(13) “Centered”, by Mwalimu K. Bomani Baruti
(14) “2000 Seasons”, by Ayi Kwei Armah
(15) “Zoroastrianism: History, Beliefs, and Practices”
(16) Jewish beliefs
(17) “The basics of Christian beliefs”
(18) “The 42 Laws of Maat Under Kemet Law”
(19) “Hammurabi Code”
(20) The Holy Bible (The King James version)
(21) “The Egyptian Book of The Dead”, as translated by Raymond Faulkner
(21) “The Hadiths” by Sahih Bukhari
(23) “Traditional Berber Religion”
(24) “Ta-Seti, World’s Oldest Civilization”
(25) More links of evidence proving that the ancient Kemetu/Anu were not Semites and their language was not Semitic either.
(26) “The peopling of Ancient Egypt and the Deciphering of the Meoroitic Script” by Dr. Theophile Obenga
(27) “When We Ruled” by Robin Walker
(28) See the Writings by Francois Lenormant on Cuneiform inscriptions and Sumerian