What Does Bakkah Mean in the Quran?

Here is an article by Zeshan Zaveri (zzaveri from shiachat)

I have always asked myself why did Allāh (سبحانه و تعالى) use the word “Bakkah” in reference to the city of Makkah in Chapter 3 (Ali Imrān) verse 96 when Allāh (سبحانه و تعالى) states the following:

«إِنَّ أَوَّلَ بَيْتٍ وُضِعَ لِلنَّاسِ لَلَّذِى بِبَكَّةَ مُبَارَكاً وَ هُدًى لِّلْعَالَمِينَ»

“Most sure the first house appointed for mankind is the one at Bakkah, blessed and a guided for the nations” (3:96)

Why does he selectively choose this word “Bakkah” even knowing that we Muslims will always refer to the Holy City as Makkah.

First of all what does the word “Bakkah” mean?

Here is a Hasan (Good) narration from the Imām al-Sādiq (عليه السلام) which gives the meaning of the word Bakkah.

عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي عُمَيْرٍ عَنْ مُعَاوِيَةَ بْنِ عَمَّارٍ قَالَ قُلْتُ لِأَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع أَقُومُ أُصَلِّي بِمَكَّةَ وَ الْمَرْأَةُ بَيْنَ يَدَيَّ جَالِسَةٌ أَوْ مَارَّةٌ فَقَالَ لَا بَأْسَ إِنَّمَا سُمِّيَتْ بَكَّةَ لِأَنَّهَا تَبُكُّ فِيهَا الرِّجَالُ وَ النِّسَاءُ

From Mu`āwiyah bin `Ammār said, I said to Abī `Abd Allāh (عليه السلام) ‘I stand to pray in Makkah and a woman is sitting in front of me or she passes by.’  He (عليه السلام) said: ‘There is no problem.  It is called Bakkah because men and women weep (cry) there.’

Source:

1.     Al-Kulaynī, Al-Kāfī, ed. `Alī Akbar al-Ghaffārī, 8 vols., (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyyah, 3^rd Edition, 1388 AH), vol. 4, pg. 526, hadeeth # 7

2.     Al-Tūsī, Tahdhīb al-Aḥkām, 10 vols., (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyyah, 4^th Edition, 1407 AH), vol. 5, pg. 451, hadeeth # 220

Grading:

1.     Al-Majlisī said this hadeeth is Hasan (Good)
à Mir’āt Al-`Uqūl, 26 vols., (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyyah, 1410 AH), vol. 18, pg. 222

Now in hindsight after the Imām has already explained it to us what Bakkah means it makes even more sense because the word “bukaa” or “bakaa” بكي in the Arabic language means to “cry” and “weep”.  What is even more amazing is how the Imām (عليه السلام) was not asked directly about the meaning of the word “Bakkah”.  He is being asked if it is ok to have a woman sitting or passing by him when he is praying in Makkah.  The Imām (عليه السلام) has provided a treasure trove of knowledge with this response.

The word “Bakkah” can be found in the Old Testament in Book of Psalms Chapter 84 verse 6 it says:

King James Version:  Who passing through the valley of Baca make it a well; the rain also filleth the pools.

In most translations of the Old Testament, the word is usually left untranslated as Baca, but in some translations they have actually translated the word.  Subhan Allāh, they have translated the word “Baca” as “weeping”.  See the translations below.

American Standard Version - Passing through the valley of Weeping they make it a place of springs; Yea, the early rain covereth it with blessings.

New Living Translation - When they walk through the Valley of Weeping, it will become a place of refreshing springs. The autumn rains will clothe it with blessings.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English - They passed by the valley of weeping and they have made it a dwelling place, also blessings will cover The Lawgiver.

English Revised Version - Passing through the valley of Weeping they make it a place of springs; yea, the early rain covereth it with blessings.

World English Bible - Passing through the valley of Weeping, they make it a place of springs. Yes, the autumn rain covers it with blessings.

Young’s Literal Translation - Those passing through a valley of weeping, A fountain do make it, Blessings also cover the director.

Douay-Rheims Bible - In the vale of tears, in the place which be hath set.

Source:

1.       http://bible.cc/psalms/84-6.htm

Glory to Allah! Even with all the Tahreef (distortion) done by the Jews and Christians to their books (Torah/Bible) the truth can never be completely removed.   Futhermore,  in the Quran Makkah is referred to as a valley as well.

 If you take a look at Chapter 48 (FatH) verse 24 Allāh (سبحانه و تعالى) states the following.

«وَهُوَ الَّذِي كَفَّ أَيْدِيَهُمْ عَنكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ عَنْهُم بِبَطْنِ مَكَّةَ مِن بَعْدِ أَنْ أَظْفَرَكُمْ عَلَيْهِمْ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرًا»

“And He it is Who held back their hands from you and your hands from them in the valley of Mecca after He had given you victory over them; and Allah is Seeing what you do” (48:24)

Most translators of the Qur’ān have translated بِبَطْنِ مَكَّةَ as the “valley of Mecca”. (Click for More Translations)

So the Imām’s (عليه السلام) simple reply ended up tying in the actual meaning of the word “Bakkah” to its original roots when mentioned in the Book of Psalms (Zaboor) of Prophet Dāwud (عليه السلام).  This is a perfect example of how Qur’ān and ḥadīth work together in a very harmonious manner in explaining each other.

Crucifixion

Here is another great article by Qa'im bin Mohammad


السلام عليكم

«وَقُلْ جَاء الْحَقُّ وَزَهَقَ الْبَاطِلُ إِنَّ الْبَاطِلَ كَانَ زَهُوقًا»

 And say: Truth hath come and falsehood hath vanished away. Lo! falsehood is ever bound to vanish. (17:81)

This is my third instalment in the series regarding the trials, crucifixion, and resurrection of Jesus (as). I would highly recommend you first check out my analysis of Jesus' (as) trial at the Sanhedrin, in the Christianity section of this blog, Reviving al-Islam, where I conclude that the alleged trial of Jesus in front of the Sanhedrin violates 22 Sanhedrin laws, and was therefore historically improbable. Then, in Part II, (found here: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/234974347-pontious-pilate-and-jesus-a/ ) I analyzed Jesus' trial in front of Pontious Pilate, and point out some strange inconsistencies and coincidences.

I will focus on the crucifixion in this thread, and then insha'Allah Part IV will be concerning the resurrection.

Introduction of the Crucifixion

The crucifixion and atonement is a central doctrine in Christian theology. Through the alleged crucifixion of our Messiah (as), Christians believe in the atonement of sin. In Christian theology the atonement refers to the forgiving or pardoning of sin through the death of Jesus Christ by crucifixion, which made possible the reconciliation between God and creation. Some believe the sacrifice of Jesus pays for all past and future sins, while others believe that it pardons the original sin of Adam, carried by all humans.

I will mainly be analyzing the crucifixion as an event, rather than a theology, through the four Gospels and analyze their historicity.

The Gospels and the Crucifixion side by side

Exhibit A: Carrying the Cross

This point will look at the four Gospels in parallel, concerning the event of Jesus allegedly carrying the cross to the place of crucifixion.

 Mark 15:21 : Simon of Cyrene carries the cross after Jesus fails to do so.

 Matthew 27:32 : Simon of Cyrene carries the cross after Jesus fails to do so.

 Luke 23:26 : Simon of Cyrene carries the cross after Jesus fails to do so.

 John : No mention of Simon of Cyrene. Carries the cross the entire way.

(Note: I put "Mark" before "Matthew" because most Biblical scholars will agree that it is older)

It would make sense for John to differ on this subject, as he was writing in a period where Christian theology was being developed (circa 90-120 CE) and may have wanted to emphasize the idea of the "suffering servant" more than his predecessors. John was more 'dogmatic' than his predecessors, emphasizing the teachings about Jesus (as) (the Word is God, I AM, I and the Father are one, the Comforter, and more). To say that Simon carried the cross would be directing the focus away from Jesus in the holiest day of Christian theology.

Exhibit B: What was written on the Cross?

 Mark 15:26 : The King of the Jews

 Matthew 27:37 : This is Jesus the King of the Jews

 Luke 23:38 : This is the King of the Jews

 John 19:19 : Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews

Most Christians assert that these Gospels were written by eyewitnesses, divinely inspired to write their accounts. However, to differ on something as simple as what was written on the cross would alone question their authenticity and question other details that the Gospel writers could have gotten wrong.

Exhibit C: Thieves

Historically, the Romans did not crucify thieves, despite some Gospel accounts that say Jesus was crucified with thieves. They would usually crucify their political enemies rather than common criminals.

Matthew 27:44: The two thieves taunt Jesus

Luke 23:39-42: One thief taunts Jesus and is criticized by the other. Jesus promises the 2nd thief that they would be in Paradise together that day, though John and Acts say he did not ascend to heaven until 40 days after his resurrection

Exhibit D: Witnesses of the Crucifixion

The witnesses of the crucifixion story play a key role in the story. We know that none of Jesus' apostles (ra) actually witnesses the crucifixion, according to the Gospels:

"And they all forsook him, and fled." (Mark 14:50)

So none of Jesus' inner circle saw this event. Who was there?

Mark: Mark 15:40-41 says that many women watched from a distance and specifically mentions "Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome."

Matthew: The only reference to followers of Jesus is found in Matthew 27:55-56, which says that many women were "watching from a distance", and specifically names "Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's sons." (Biblical scholars will assert that Salome and "the mother of Zebedee's sons" is the same person to prevent this contradiction; for argument's sake I will give that to them).

Luke: Witnesses from a distance but no names are given.

John: Here we see a grand difference with the synoptic Gospels, once again. John 19:25 says that the witnesses were Maryam (as), Jesus' aunt, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. The inclusion of Maryam was possibly a literary device - considering none of the inner circle saw the crucifixion, John may have seen it necessary to include a close figure to the witnesses of Jesus' alleged crucifixion, to remove any doubt from the story. What's also interesting is that while the synoptic books claimed the witnesses stood at a distance, while John says that they were standing right by the cross, talking to Jesus. Again, this may have been inserted to remove doubt from the crucifixion story.

Christians will try to solve this problem by saying that the witnesses were far, and then moved up closer. This, however, is not what the Gospels say. This is an effort to reconcile with the contradictions - the Gospels were not compiled together into a set until the 2nd century, and were not written with the intention of being compiled together. Each Gospel is a standalone text, with their own authors and goals, and their fusion was not foreseen by their authors - they were not created to complement each other.

Exhibit E: Hour of Crucifixion

 Mark 15:25 : Jesus was crucified on the third hour.

 Matthew : Hour not specified; but sixth hour passes during the crucifixion.

 Luke : Hour not specified; but sixth hour passes during the crucifixion.

 John 19:14-15 : Jesus was crucified on the sixth hour.

   Exhibit F: Jesus' Last Words 

 Mark 15:34-37 : Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachtani?

Matthew 27:46-50: Eli, Eli, lama sabachtani?

Mark was most likely Greek, and Matthew was either a Greek or Hellenized Jew. Here, we see them disagreeing on this word: Eli or Eloi? They are both wrong - the Aramaic word is the same as the Arabic word, "Ilahi" meaning "my God". However, they both differ from the other Gospel accounts on Jesus' last words.

 Luke 23:46: Jesus says: “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit.”

 John 19:30 : Jesus says: “It is finished.”

  Exhibit G: Spear Thrust 

 Mark : Nothing

 Matthew : Nothing

 Luke : Nothing

 John 19:34 : A Roman soldier pierced Jesus' side with a spear to make sure that he was dead.

As analyzed in earlier exhibits, John has obviously been playing "clean-up" throughout the crucifixion event. Where there are doubts or loose ends in the earlier accounts, John has managed to add, change, omit, and clarify all throughout his Gospel. From the Gospels we know that Jesus (as) was allegedly on the cross only for a few hours. Historically, Josephus writes that crucifixions were known to last several days - some lasted up to a week - and not for a short amount of time. Thus, it would be natural that as the synoptic Gospels were being distributed, some readers would point out that Jesus could have simply fell unconscious, and rose out of his tomb wounded, as a few hours was simply not enough to kill a man. In fact, the Romans would break one's legs to quicken the crucifixion process to lasting a few days rather than longer, but the Gospels assert that Jesus' legs were not broken.

John however mentions a spear thrust to Jesus' side to remove such doubts and thus "solve" the problem.

  Conclusion

Thus, we see that although these late-first and early-second century scriptures provide a detailed account of the crucifixion of Jesus (as), they differ and contradict each other on some very basic premises. This should not come as a surprise, as each individual Gospel had a different author, and were written in slightly different time periods. Just as the four accounts of the Sanhedrin trial had some fishy elements, the historicity of the crucifixion is questioned through the ambiguity and irrationality of the story.

The Qur'an withholds the position that Jesus (as) was in fact not crucified, but rather, God let the plans of those who opposed him fail.

May God guide us to the true teachings of the prophets (as), and hasten the long awaited returns of our Messiah and the twelfth Imam.

السلام عليكم

The Misconception of Jesus and the Sanhedrin Trial

Click Here to download this article in PDF format.
Here is an excellent article that Qa’im ibn Mohamad wrote:

السلام عليكم

I would like to analyze the alleged trial of Jesus عليه السلام, depicted by the New Testament, in front of the Jewish Sanhedrin.

The Sanhedrin was essentially an ancient and holy religious court in Palestine. It consisted of an assembly or council of 71 Jewish judges, one from each city of Palestine. The Sanhedrin would hold trials for the Children of Israel and rule based on the Mosaic laws and works of scholars. It was formally dissolved due to Roman persecution.

In relation to the Gospels, the Sanhedrin conspired against the Messiah عليه السلام by paying Judas Iscariot 30 pieces of silver in exchange for Jesus عليه السلام. The witnesses at the trial of Jesus عليه السلام claimed that he had committed blasphemy, which was a capital crime.

Chaim H. Cohn, the late Israeli Supreme Court Justice, was an expert on ancient Jewish law. In his book Reflections on the Trial and Death of Jesus, where Cohn asks questions and casts doubt on the story of Jesus’ trial, he outlined 22 conditions that a trial must pass before heading to the Sanhedrin. The Jews hold these conditions and traditions very highly, as it is a well-documented religious tradition that was carried out for centuries. If a trial had violated any of the 22 conditions, it was immediately thrown out and not conducted. I wanted to analyze the trial of Jesus according to the Gospels in relation to these 22 conditions, to see if this trial was probable and really could have taken place.

Laws of the Sanhedrin Regarding Trials:

1. There was to be no arrest by religious authorities that was effected by a bribe Ex. 23:8
2. There were to be no steps of criminal proceedings after sunset.
3. Judges or Sanhedrin members were not allowed to participate in the arrest.
4. There were to be no trials before the morning sacrifice.
5. There were to be no secret trials, only public.
6. Sanhedrin trials could only be conducted in the Hall of Judgment of the Temple Compound.
7. The procedure was to be first the defense and then the accusation.
8. All may agree in favor of acquittal, but all may not argue in favor of conviction.
9. There were to be two or three witness and their testimony had to agree in every detail. Deu. 19:15.
10. There was to be no allowance for the accused to testify against himself.
11. The High Priest was forbidden to rent his garments. Leviticus 21:10
12. Charges could not originate with the judges; they could only investigate charges brought to them.
13. The accusation of blasphemy was only valid if the name, of G-d, itself was pronounced (and heard by 2 witnesses).
14. A person could not be condemned on the basis of his own words alone.
15. The verdict could not be announced at night, only in the daytime.
16. In cases of capital punishment, the trial and guilty verdict could not occur at the same time but must be separated by at least 24 hours.
17. Voting for he death penalty had to be done by individual count beginning with the youngest so the young would not be influenced by the elders.
18. A unanimous decision for guilt shows innocence since it is impossible for 23-71 men to agree without plotting.
19. The sentence could only be pronounced three days after the guilty verdict.
20. Judges were to be humane and kind.
21. A person condemned to death was not to be scourged or beaten beforehand.
22. No trials are allowed on the eve of the Sabbath or on a feast day.

More info: http://jdstone.org/c...es/s_trial.html
http://jdstone.org/cr/pages/jezuz.html

1. Was there a bribe? Yes - the council allegedly bribed Judas Iscariot, one of the disciples of Jesus عليه السلام. "Then one of the twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests and said, ‘What will you give me if I betray him to you?’ They paid him thirty pieces of silver. And from that moment he began to look for an opportunity to betray him." (Matthew 26:14-16)

2. The criminal proceeding was happening throughout the night. My proof is Matthew 26, when Jesus عليه السلام is arrested, taken to the criminal hearing, and Peter رضي الله عنه denies him three times. Verse 34 "this night before the rooster crows, you will deny Me three times". Verses 40 and 45, the disciples are sleeping. Verses 57-68, the criminal hearing, testimonies, and witnesses are taking place. 69-74, Peter is outside in the courtyard denying Jesus. Verse 75, the rooster crows. All of this was at night, and therefore, illegal by Jewish trial laws.

3. Chief priests, elders, and scribes took part in the arrest. "And immediately, while he yet spake, cometh Judas, one of the twelve, and with him a great multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and the scribes and the elders." (Mark 14:43)

4. No trials before morning sacrifice - see point number 2.

5. I don't know if the trial was conducted in secret, but Luke 22:54 alleges that Peter had followed the arrest in a distance. John 18:16 says Peter stood outside the courthouse, at the courtyard (which is confirmed by other Gospels). In other words, Peter, who was the best friend of Jesus had secretly followed those that arrested him and did not walk inside the "public trial".

6. The trial did not take place in the Hall of Judgment or Temple Compound. It took place in a house. "Having arrested Him, they led Him and brought Him into the high priest's house... (Luke 22:54)

7. In none of the Gospel accounts was Jesus given a defense procedure prior to their accusations and the trial's false witnesses, which yet again breaks another Sanhedrin code.

8. All argued in favor of conviction; we find no evidence that any of them were not in favor. "Now the chief priests, the elders, and all the council sought false testimony against Jesus to put him to death" (Matthew 26:59) First person not in favour was Pilate.

9. The testimonies of the witnesses are all thrown out by the Sanhedrin in Mark 14:55. Then two witnesses said that they had heard Jesus عليه السلام say that he will destroy the Temple and rebuild it in 3 days. Mark 14:59 says even these two testimonies did not agree. Therefore, not fulfilling this requirement.

10. Jesus عليه السلام practically testifies against himself by keeping silent as the witnesses bore false testimonies. In all accounts, Jesus kept silent when questioned if he had threatened to destroy and rebuild the Temple, which according to Mark, was a false and inconsistent testimony. Jesus MUST answer to this accusation to fulfill the requirements of the Sanhedrin. Also, to claim to be the son of God (in Hebrew, it means a righteous person) and/or Messiah is not a crime in Mosaic law, and therefore a blasphemy sentence cannot be achieved from this.

11. The high priest ripped his clothes. Mark 14:63-64: "Tearing his clothes, the high priest said, 'What further need do we have of witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy; how does it seem to you?' And they all condemned him to be deserving of death."

12. The initial charges in Mark 14:56-59 were not the ones acted on. The Sanhedrin had acted on the question posed by the high priest in verse 61, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?", in 62 Jesus says he is, in 63-64 the high priest says "What further need do we have of witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy! What do you think?" and all condemned him to death. Therefore, the charge acted on was the one initiated by the high priest and not the ones brought forth from the witnesses.

13. Jesus عليه السلام did not pronounce the name of God (YHVH) and therefore did not blaspheme.

14. One cannot be condemned based on words alone - Jesus was condemned based on his words alone, in every version of the trial. His crime was the claim to be the son of God and Messiah, both of which are not a crime in Mosaic law.

15. The trial and verdict was all done at night before the rooster had crowed, as proven earlier.

16. The trial and verdict was all done within the same night, therefore, violating the 24 hour gap rule.

17. The high priest announced the verdict initially, and not in order from youngest to oldest (or any particular order).

18. A unanimous decision in the Sanhedrin equals innocence, since an entire council of 23-71 men cannot agree together without illegal plotting. The council was unanimous, therefore Jesus عليه السلام would have been let free and not convicted

19. The council immediately brought Jesus to Pilate in Mark 15:1, and the crucifixion took place in the third hour of the same day (Mark 15:25).

20. The Judges, elders, and scribes had beaten the Messiah عليه السلام throughout the trial, mocked him, and later followed him to the crucifixion, mocked him more, made a crown of thorns, etc.

21. Mark 14:65, Jesus was blindfolded and beaten at the courthouse.

22. Mark 14 indicates that it was indeed Passover (verse 14). Luke 22 as well.

Therefore, I conclude that the trial of Jesus according to the Gospels violated each of the 22 conditions. Traditionally, in Judaism, a trial is thrown out if one condition was violated, but here we see the violation of the entire structure of this trial and sentence. What is also interesting is that none of the 4 Gospel writers actually point out that the Jews had conducted this trial upside down; there is no mention that procedures had been broken, pointing to the authors’ likely ignorance over such important facts of Jewish judicial tradition.

These facts speak volumes about the historical accuracy of the New Testament. The likelihood of this taking place is very improbable, as the Sanhedrin strictly followed its code and traditional procedures in most trials. What we find in the Gospels resembles the Sanhedrin in no way. This means that either a) the authors were awfully misinformed on the traditions of the Sanhedrin, as they were Greeks, b ) the Jews had unusually and deliberately violated all of their traditions without the Gospel writers making note of this, or c) the trial simply did not occur. Either way, the story does not really add up.