1) IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF THE BIBLE - ACTUAL LOCATION OF THE WILDERNESS OF BEERSHEBA (WELL OF SEVEN) IS WELL OF ZAMZAM, WILDERNESS OF PARAN, AND MORIAH IS MARWAH, mentioned in the Bible
2) SCIENTIFIC / MEDICAL BENEFITS OF ZAMZAM AND ITS HEALING PROPERTIES AND ENERGY
a) Dr. Knut Pfieffer - German Scientist/Doctor of Internal medicine
b) Dr. Masaru Emoto - Japanese Scientist
c) Dr. Zaghloul - Egyptian Geologist
d) Dr. Yahya Koshak - PHD Engineering KSA
1) IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF THE BIBLE - ACTUAL LOCATION OF THE WILDERNESS OF BEERSHEBA (WELL OF SEVEN) IS WELL OF ZAMZAM, WILDERNESS OF PARAN, AND MORIAH IS MARWAH, mentioned in the Bible
2) SCIENTIFIC / MEDICAL BENEFITS OF ZAMZAM AND ITS HEALING PROPERTIES AND ENERGY
a) Dr. Knut Pfieffer - German Scientist/Doctor of Internal medicine
b) Dr. Masaru Emoto - Japanese Scientist
c) Dr. Zaghloul - Egyptian Geologist
d) Dr. Yahya Koshak - PHD Engineering KSA
e) Ulcerative Keratitis And Zamzam Water
f) Removal Of Kidney Stones Without Surgery
g) Zamzam Water And Recovery From Cancer
1) IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF THE BIBLE - ACTUAL LOCATION OF THE WILDERNESS OF BEERSHEBA (WELL OF SEVEN) IS WELL OF ZAMZAM, WILDERNESS OF PARAN, AND MORIAH IS MARWAH, mentioned in the Bible
Appendix-I (From the book "The only son offered
for sacrifice: Isaac or Ishmael by Dr. Abdul Sattar Ghauri http://neurotherapy-of-christian-brain.blogspot.ae/2012/10/the-only-son-offered-for-sacrifice_12.html
)
Beersheba
(the Well of Seven or the Well of ZAMZAM)
‘Beersheba’ has been
referred to in the body of the book a number of times. It required a detailed
study, which could not have been undertaken there. It is discussed in detail in
this appendix. The names of persons or places and their spellings have mostly
been recorded in accordance with the Bible or the source books. The scheme of
the symbols of transliteration of the present work has not been applied in the
quotations. Generally, the scheme of the symbols of the source of the
quotations has been followed. The salient features of this Appendix are:
1) Abraham had settled his elder son, Ishma‘el, together with his
mother Hagar, at the ‘Wilderness
of Beersheba’, ‘Wilderness of Paran’, or ‘Moriah’ (Zamzam, al-Hijaz, and
al-Marwah) under the command of God: and not as a result of
some so called jealousy or dispute between Hagar and Sarah.
2) The event of settling Ishma‘el and Hagar at Beersheba took
place in the childhood of Ishma‘el—when Isaac had not even been born yet—and
the story of the weaning feast and the alleged jealousy of Sarah 296 and her heinous cruelties towards Hagar are
mere fables.
3) Hagar and Ishma‘el were not cast away out of the door to wander
helplessly in some wild
wilderness without any guidance. Such a ruthless and inconsiderate
treatment is unbecoming and inconceivable of a common gentleman rather than of
a benign and benevolent Apostle of Abraham’s calibre. Abraham must himself have
taken them to the destination appointed by God for their settlement, which he
actually did.
4) ‘Beersheba’ is a meaningful word and means (i) ‘the Well of seven’ and (ii)
‘the Well of an Oath’
5) According to the record of the Bible ‘Beersheba’ can be located
at more than one places. It has occurred in the Bible 34 times, but it is only
once that it has been preceded by the qualifying word ‘wilderness’.
6) This singular use of the qualifying word ‘wilderness’ before
‘Beersheba’ singles out the ‘Beersheba of the Well of seven’ from the rest of the ‘Beersheba’s’
and signifies exactly the region of Makkah.
7) In this context it denotes the well given to Hagar as a result
of her seven rounds of running between the mounts of ‘al-S afa ’ and
‘al-Marwah’ in search of water.
8) As such, this ‘Beersheba’ is the well of ‘Zamzam’ in Makkah.
9) It is quite different from the ‘Beersheba of the Well of Oath’,
which is at the SW of Canaan 297
.jpg)
10) The story of the Bible is a blend of various traditions and
has a lot of objectionable and self-contradictory material in it. Therefore any
of its statement is to be taken only after due scrutiny, and on its own
merit.
The ‘wilderness
of Beersheba’, where Hagar ‘wandered’ with her child, Ishma ‘el, after
Abraham had left her there, is mentioned in the Bible as below (Most of the
points regarding this forthcoming passage have been discussed in a pretty
detail, at the spot, in the footnotes. Therefore, no detailed discussion has
been undertaken regarding them in the body of the article. These footnotes
should be perused side by side with the following text of the Bible.):
And the child [Isaac] grew, and was weaned298: and Abraham made a
great feast the same day that Isaac was weaned. And Sarah saw the son of
Hagar the Egyptian, 299 which she had born
unto Abraham, mocking300. Wherefore she said unto Abraham, cast out 301 this bondwoman302 and her son 303: for the son of this
bondwoman shall not be heir with my son304 [stress added], even with Isaac305. And the thing was
very grievous in Abraham’s sight 306 because of his son307. And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight
because of the lad308, and because of thy bondwoman;309 in all that Sarah
hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.
And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a [great] nation310, because he is thy
seed311. And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a
bottle312 of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and
the child to Hagar313 and sent her away 314 and she departed, and wandered in the
wilderness of Beer-sheba315 [stress
added]. And
the water was spent in the bottle, and she cast the child under one of the
shrubs316[stress added]. And she went, and sat her down over against him a good way off,
as it were a bowshot: for she said, Let me not see the death of the child. And
she sat over against him, and lift up her voice, and wept. And God heard the
voice of the lad317; and the angel of God318 called to Hagar out
of heaven319 , and said unto her,
What aileth thee, Hagar? 320 Fear not321; for God hath heard
the voice of the lad where he is 322. Arise, lift up the
lad, and hold him in thine hand323; for I will make him
a great nation. And God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she
went, and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad drink [stress added] 324. And God was with
the lad 325; and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness, and became an archer.
And he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran326: and his mother took
him a wife out of the land of Egypt. 327
Some important points of, or related to, this ‘wilderness of Beersheba’,
are explained below:
a) To ascertain the
location of the wilderness
of Beersheba it is to be noted that Chapter 21 of the book of Genesis of
the Bible, from which this narrative has been taken, is a mixture of the three
intricately interwoven traditions (Yahwistic, Priestly, and Elohistic).328
b) As to the narrative reproduced above (Gen. 21:8-21), it
is solely an Elohist Version. 329
This is mainly a narrative of the story of Hagar and Ishma‘el and
ends with v.21. From v.22 to the end of the chapter, there is another story
(regarding a treaty at certain other Beersheba [Well of Oath] between Abraham
and Abimelech). It is quite a separate narrative and has nothing to do with the
story of Hagar and Ishma‘el near Beersheba (Well of seven). Scholars differ as to whether it
is Elohistic or Yahwistic. 330
c) The word Beersheba
has been used at 34 places in the Bible. It is only once in the whole of the
Bible that it is preceded by the qualifying word wilderness (Gen. 21:14) and
Abraham had settled Hagar and her son Ishma‘el in it. It is for the first
time that the word Beersheba has been introduced in the Bible. At the same time
it is the sole place in the whole of the Bible where the word Beersheba is
related to Hagar and Ishma ‘el both. The ‘Beersheba’ related to the treaty
between Abraham and Abimelech is quite a different place, hundreds of miles
away from it, and having nothing to do with it.
d) ‘Wilderness’
means ‘uncultivated, barren, uneven, and mountainous land or desert’. The word
has also been used in the Bible figuratively in the sense of ‘uninhabited’,
though it is not its literal sense. The original Hebrew word used in the Bible
for this ‘wilderness’ is ‘Midbar’. In the English Bible, the Hebrew word
‘Midbar’ has been translated either with the word ‘wilderness’ or with
‘desert’. The use of this word ‘Midbar’ in the Bible in the sense of
‘uncultivated and uninhabited place’ is obvious from: ‘Yet the defenced city
shall be desolate331, and left like a wilderness [in Hebrew ‘midbar’]’.332 It has also been applied to convey other
senses or implications in the Bible. Stanley A. Cook explains in Enc.
Biblica: The English word ‘desert’
ordinarily means a sterile sandy plain without vegetation and water–a ‘sea of
sand’ such as, e.g., parts of the Sahara. This is not the meaning of the Hebrew
word. No desert of this kind was known to Israel either before or after the
occupation of Canaan. (…) midbar; AV ‘desert,’ RV ‘wilderness’; (…). It is
commonly employed to denote the wilderness of wanderings, which itself is a
mountainous region, (…). The most prominent is that which was the scene of the
wandering of Israel. It is commonly called ham-Midbar; (…), and with this
agrees the circumstance that it is only in the later writings that the horror
and lonesomeness of the ‘wilderness’ is referred to (e.g., Dt.
8:15).333
In the OT (according
to the ‘Authorized’ and ‘Revised’ English Versions), the English word
‘wilderness’ has been used 270 times, out of which it has been used 256
times as the translation of ‘Midbar’. In the Hebrew Bible (OT), there are
different words for it (e.g. ‘Midbar’, ‘Sarab’, ‘Arabah’,‘Yasheemon’, ‘Tohoo’,
‘Kharabah’, etc.). The Heb. Word ‘Midbar’, is the most commonly used word for
‘wilderness’ and ‘desert’, and has been used in the OT for 269 times (256 times
in the meaning of ‘wilderness’; and 13
times in the meaning of ‘desert’). Another Hebrew word for ‘wilderness’ is
‘Arabah’, which has been used for 59 times in different meanings (e.g. 5 times
in the meaning of ‘wilderness’; and 8 times in the meaning of ‘desert’, etc.).
This ‘Arabah’ signifies a barren and sterile land, hence ‘Arabia’. Other Hebrew
words (e.g. Tohoo, Yasheemon, etc.) have also been used for this ‘wilderness’
for a number of times. The word used here is ‘Midbar’. It has been explained by
Shemaryahu Talmon, Professor, Bible Studies and Dean, Faculty of Humanities in
the Hebrew Univ. of Jerusalem, in his detailed article ‘Wilderness’ in the
Supplementary Volume of the Interpreter’s Dic. of Bible, according to which it
refers to:
(…) arid or semiarid areas which are not suited for permanent
settlement but in part can be utilized as pasture lands for small stock. (….).
In the majority of occurrences, ‘wilderness’ carries negative overtones,
referring to parched, inhospitable, and dangerous places. (….). No trees or
other vegetation grow in this barren void, and no husbanded animals or civilized
men live there. Anyone who ventures into this wilderness suffers hunger and
thirst. (…). This wilderness is synonymous with utter distress, a place cut off
from life. (…). The Mesopotamian, for which Arabian desert lay to the W,
where the sun sets, identified the wilderness as the area which leads to the
nether [in a lower place or position] world. This idea appears to be reflected
in scriptures in which midhbar, erabha, s`amama contrast with the Garden of Eden, the source of life and
abundant growth334.
W.L. Reed explains in the same Dic. of the Bible:
The translation of several different words [he has written here in
Heb. script: Midbar, Yasheemon, `arabah, etc.]; often used interchangeably with
‘DESERT.’ An accurate translation is difficult, because the so-called wilderness
regions included arid and semiarid territory as well as sandy desert, rocky
plateaus, pasture lands, and desolate mountain terrain. Such regions
existed in Canaan and beyond its E and S borders.
335
Smith’s Dic. of Bible
explains:
MIDBAR. (…). It is most frequently used for those tracts of waste land
which lie beyond the cultivated ground,336
Harper’s Bible Dic.
explains:
Wilderness, a desolate or deserted area devoid of civilization.
One Hebrew word above all others is used for ‘wilderness,’ or ‘desert,’ in the
OT: midbar, indicating both ‘that which is desolate and deserted’ and ‘that
which is beyond,’ i.e., beyond the limits of settlement and therefore of
government control, perceived by both city dwellers and villagers as being
essentially disorderly and dangerous, the home of wild beasts and savage
wandering tribes. In time of war or repression refugees would flee to the
midbar; (….). Midbar was for them, as ‘wilderness’ was originally in English,
the wild, alarming wasteland, where men and women find themselves bewildered
and disoriented.337
It means that the
word ‘midbar’ used in the Hebrew Bible for ‘wilderness’ signifies a
mountainous, sandy, desolate, inarable place, which is quite similar to the wilderness of Beersheba
and Paran.
e)
‘Beersheba’338
is a meaningful word. 339 It
has literally two different meanings which are:
(i)
‘a Well of seven’340; and
(ii)
a well of an oath or covenant’341 .
The
‘Beersheba’ related to the oath of Abraham and Abimelech, next to this story of
Hagar and Ishma‘el, which starts with v. 22 of this chapter, is ‘the well of
the oath’, from which it took its name.342
f) In this paragraph a study
of the ‘Beersheba’ related to the ‘the well of the oath’ is being undertaken.
Some important authorities are being quoted here to elaborate these second
meanings. Hasting’s Revd. Dic. of Bible explains that it was a place:
where he [Abraham] made a covenant with Abimelech, from which the
place is alleged to take its
name (‘well of the covenant,’ according to one interpretation).343
J. Hasting’s Dic. of
the Bible explains:
It (…) received its name (‘Well of the oath’) as having been the
place, marked by a well, where Abraham entered into covenant with Abimelech,
king of Gerar (Gn 21:31 E).344
According to McKenzie,
it is:
about 28 mi [miles] S [South; according to Interpreter’s Dic. of
Bible ‘SW’ (1:375)] of Hebron.345
Hebron (which is now
called ‘Al-Khalil’) lies twenty miles south (SSW) of Jerusalem346. This Hebron was the
place where Abraham had permanently settled with his first wife Sarah; but he
spent most of his own time at Beer-sheba, with his large number of flocks and
herds, on his land, which was
offered to him by Abimelech (Gen. 20:15); and dictionaries
of the Bible have recorded the fact that it was a suitable pasture for the
herds and flocks, for example Harper’s B.D. explains:
The Beer-sheba plain with its ample winter pasturage is well
suited for seminomadic living; thus it served as the principal homestead of
Israel’s patriarchs.347
. F. F. Bruce asserts
that it had been a green grassy valley with human settlements in it, as back as
4th millennium BC: On both sides of the Beer-sheba valley, in the Negeb, there is
evidence of human settlement going back to the Chalcolithic Age (later fourth
millennium BC [Gr. Chalkos = copper + lithos + stone]). (….). The Beer-sheba
valley and its neighborhood were frequented by pastoralists like Abraham
because the water-table was sufficiently high to be tapped by the digging of
wells. 348
E. Hull has
described its present condition in similar way in the Hasting’s Dic. of
Bible:
The soil in the valleys where there is some moisture is
exceedingly rich, and is rudely cultivated by the fellahin, who succeed in
producing fine crops of wheat and barley. In the tracts around Beer-sheba the
Bedawin find ample pasturage for their flocks and herds, which towards evening
assemble in crowds around the wells as they did three thousand years ago.349
It was quite a different
place from the ‘Wilderness
of Beersheba’, where Abraham had settled Hagar and Ishma ‘el.
g) A detailed account
of the ‘Wilderness of
Beersheba’ which is related to Hagar and Ishma ‘el is being afforded in
the next paragraph. This Beersheba of Hagar and Ishma ‘el was, in true sense of word, a
‘wilderness’: being a desolate, mountainous, sandy, sterile, uneven, and
uncultivated land; whereas the ‘well of Oath’ was a beautiful valley with
thick green pastures where human settlements have been traced by the
archaeologists as ancient as the fourth millennium BC, and where the very
Bible asserts the existence of a ‘city’ in Isaac’s times (Gen.
26:33).
As such it could not have been the place where Abraham had
settled Hagar and her son Ishma‘el, which had been a Midbar, i.e., a desolate,
uneven, mountainous, sandy, sterile, and uncultivated ‘wilderness’ in true
sense of word.
h) The ‘Beersheba’ in the first sense (the ‘Well of seven,’ 350), related to
Ishma‘el and Hagar, is being dealt with in this paragraph. In the ancient times
a name was given to a place due to the settlement of some tribe there or due to
some remarkable event which happened there, or due to some conspicuous
qualities of its location or the surroundings etc.
The same is the case with both these Beer-sheba’s. Both the
places, which were subsequently given the name of ‘Beer-sheba’, previously bore
no particular name. So they were named due to the events that took place there.
The first was called ‘Beer-sheba’ (the well of an oath or a covenant), because
an oath had been carried out there between Abraham and Abimelech.
The second was given the name
‘Beersheba’ (the Well of seven) after the seven rounds of running between
al-Safa and al-Marwah (Moriah of the Bible) by Hagar as a result of which she
was made to discover this ‘Well of seven’ by God through His angel; and this
well had been commonly called by the Arabs as ‘Zamzam’351, hence the uncultivated and uninhabited area,
surrounding this ‘Well of seven’, was given the name of the ‘Wilderness of
Beersheba’. Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam explains:
Hadjar, cast off by Abraham and seeing Ishma ‘el perishing of
thirst, ran in despair seven times from one hill to the other; 352
David Kerr
explains:
This [the circumambulation around the Ka’bah] is followed by running
seven times between two small hills [al-Safa and al-Marwah], recalling the
plight of Hagar and her son Ishmael who, in Islamic, Jewish and Christian
tradition, were saved from certain death by a spring of water which God caused
to break through the desert sands. This well is named in Islamic tradition as
Zamzam,353
After a detailed study of Arabic and Biblical accounts, a summary
of the event can be stated something like that:
An extraordinary event happened there. Leaving Hagar and her child
Ishma‘el in the mountainous, uncultivated, and sandy wilderness of Beer-sheba (Well of seven) under the
word of God, Abraham returned to his flocks and herds at Beersheba (Well of
Oath) and his abode at Hebron. The food and water left by Abraham with her was
used up in a few days. She was much perplexed and distressed. Nearby stood the
hillocks of al-Safa and alMarwah (Moriah of the Bible). She ran from one
hillock to the other in search of some food or drink, or somebody to help her;
but in vain. After seven rounds of running between al-S afa and al-Marwah, a
well was provided there for Hagar and her son in a strange manner. So the place
was given the name of ‘Beersheba’–‘the Well of seven’. Close by stood perhaps the
remnants of the Sanctuary of the Ka‘bah (or Bayt-Allah, i.e. House of Allah,
which, in Hebrew, is Beth-el), on which the building was to be raised by
Abraham and Ishmael in the near future.
It had been an
established and well-known tradition among the Arabs since remote pre-Islamic
times that while performing the Pilgrimage of Makkah, they ran (performed Sa‘y,
according to the terminology of the Isla mic Pilgrimage) between the Mounts of
al-S afa and al-Marwah ‘seven times’. Islam has retained this tradition, which
came down from the times of Abraham, to remind the believers of Abraham’s firm
faith in and his total submission to Allah, and Hagar’s trust in her Master;
and to make them follow the spirit of the event. Al-Bukhari has reported the event
in detail:
Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: ‘Ibrahim (Abraham) brought her and her son
Ishma ‘el while she used to nurse him at her breast, to a place near the Ka’bah
under a tree on the spot of Zamzam, at the highest place in the mosque. During
those days there was nobody in Makkah nor was there any water. So he made them
sit over there and placed near them a leather bag containing some dates, and a
small water-skin containing some water, and set out homeward. Ishma ‘el’s
mother followed him saying, ‘O Ibrahi m! Where are you going, leaving us in
this valley where there is no person whose company we may enjoy, nor there is
anything?’ She repeated that to him many times, but he did not look back at
her. Then she asked him, ‘Has Allah ordered you to do so?’ He said, 354‘Yes.’ She said,
‘Then He will not neglect us,’ and returned while Ibrahim proceeded onwards,
and on reaching the Thaniya where they could not see him, he faced the Ka’bah,
and raising both hands, invoked Allah saying the following supplication: O our
Lord! I have made some of my offspring to dwell in an uncultivated valley, by
Your Sacred House (…) so that they may give thanks. (v. 14:
37).
Ishma ‘el’s mother went on suckling Ishma ‘el and drinking from
the water (she had). When the water in the water-skin had all been used up, she
became [felt] thirsty and her child also became [felt] thirsty. She started
looking at him (i.e., Ishma ‘el) tossing in agony. She left him, for she could
not endure looking at him, and found that the mount of al-S afa was the nearest mountain to her on that land.
She stood on it and started looking at the valley keenly so that she might see
somebody, but she could not see anybody. Then she descended from al-Safa and
when she reached the valley, she tucked up her robe and ran in the valley like
a person in distress and trouble, till she crossed the valley and reached
al-Marwah mountain, where she stood and started looking, expecting to see
somebody, but she could not see anybody. She repeated that (running between
al-Safa and al-Marwah) seven times [stress
added]. Ibn ‘Abba s told: The Prophet (Pbuh) said, ‘This is the source
of the tradition of Sa‘y (the [briskly] walking) of people between them (i.e.,
al-S afa and Al-Marwah).’
[The Prophet continued] ‘When she reached AlMarwah (for the last
time) she heard a voice and she asked herself to be quite and listened
attentively. She heard the voice again and said: ‘O, (whoever you may be)! You
have made me hear your voice; have you got something to help me?’ And behold!
She saw an angel at the place of Zamzam, digging the earth with his heel (or
his wing), till water flowed from that place. She started to make something
like a basin around it, using her hands in this way, and started filling her
water-skin with water with her hands, and the water was flowing out after she
had scooped some of it.’
The Prophet (Pbuh) added, ‘May Allah bestow mercy on Ishma ‘el’s
mother! Had she let the Zamzam (flow without trying to control it) (or had she
not scooped from that water) (to fill her water skin), Zamzam would have been a
stream flowing on the surface of the earth.’
The Prophet [pbuh] further added, ‘Then she drank (water) and suckled her child. The
angel said to her,
“Don’t be afraid of being neglected, for this is the House of Allah,
which will be built by this boy and his father, and Allah never neglects His
people.” The House (i.e., Ka‘bah) at that time was on a high place resembling a
hillock, and when torrents came, they flowed to its right and left. She lived
in that way till some people from the tribe of Jurham or a family from Jurham
passed by her and her child, as they (i.e., the Jurham people) were coming
through the way of Kada, they landed in the lower part of Makkah where they saw
a bird that had the habit of flying around water and not leaving it. They said,
“This bird must be flying around water, though we know that there is no water
in this valley.” They sent one or two messengers who discovered the source of
water, and returned to inform them of the water. So they all came (towards the
water).’
The Prophet (Pbuh) added: ‘Ishma‘el’s mother was sitting near the
water. They asked her, “Do you allow us to stay with you?” She replied, “Yes,
but you will have no right to possess the water.” They agreed to that.’
The Prophet (Pbuh) further said, ‘Ishma ‘el’s mother was pleased
with the whole situation (…). So, they settled there, and later on they sent
for their families who came and settled with them so that some families became
permanent residents there. The child (i.e., Ishma ‘el) grew up and learnt
Arabic from them and (his virtues) caused them to love and admire him as he
grew up, and when he reached the age of puberty they made him marry a woman
from amongst them.’ It may be appreciated by a construing mind how clear,
compact, consistent, spontaneous, flawless, and logical, is the statement of
the event in this tradition.
i) It has been recorded above
that some well already existed, and was quite visible, at the site of the
‘Beersheba of the Well of Oath’, where the oath was carried out between Abraham
and Abimelech; but it was without any name. It was named ‘Beersheba or the Well
of Oath’ after the oath which was administered there between Abraham and
Abimelech. Whereas prima facie there existed no well at the site of the ‘Wilderness of Beersheba
of the Well of seven’,
and the well was subsequently provided there in an unusual way, after Abraham
had gone away, leaving Hagar and Ishma ‘el in the ‘Wilderness of Beersheba and Paran’. It
shows that the Beersheba of ‘the Well of seven’ and the Beersheba of ‘the Well of Oath’ are quite
different places.
j) There is the mention of a
third ‘Beersheba’ as well in the Bible as recorded hereunder: Abimelech came to him from Gerar with
Ahuzzath his friend and Phicol the commander of his army. Isaac said to them,
‘Why have you come here? You hate me and you sent me away.’ They answered, ‘We
have seen plainly that the Lord is with you, so we thought, Let the two of us
put each other to the oath and make a treaty that will bind us. We have not
attacked you, we have done you nothing but good, and we let you go away
peaceably. Swear that you will do us no harm, now that the Lord has blessed
you.’ So Isaac gave a feast and they ate and drank. They rose early in the
morning and exchanged oaths. Then Isaac bade them farewell, and they parted
from him in peace. The same day Isaac’s slaves came and told him about a well
that they had dug: ‘We have found water’, they said. He named the well Shibah
[there is a footnote ‘x’ on it: ‘That is Oath’]. This is why the city is called
Beersheba [there is a footnote y on it: ‘i.e. Well of an Oath’] to this day. 356
According to most of
the commentators and lexicographers of the Bible, the Beersheba concerning
Abraham and the Beersheba concerning Isaac are one and the same place. There
are others who believe they are different. There are, again, some others, who
observe that it was a mere fabrication of the redactors of the Bible. Whatever
the case may be, there is a special point to be noted here. Isaac did not find
Hagar or any of the member of Ishma ‘el family there.
Had it been the same Beersheba (Well of seven) related to Hagar and Ishma ‘el
story:
(i) It must have already existed there.
(ii) The well genuinely being the property of Hagar and Ishma ‘el,
they should have been very much there.
(iii) Ishma ‘el being a hospitable person, must have entertained
his younger brother Isaac there. But to the utter disappointment of the writer
and the readers, nothing of this sort had been witnessed there. The well did
not exist there before this event. It was dug out there by the slaves of Isaac.
There was neither Hagar nor the Ishma ‘el family on the spot to entertain
Isaac. Then it was Isaac who named it the well Shibah according to the Bible.
It means that it was a well that came into being through digging it out by the
slaves of Isaac and it was not the well that was provided and brought to the
sight of Hagar through some extra-ordinary process.
From the above data it has become quite clear that the wilderness of Beersheba
mentioned in the relevant passage of the Bible relates to the uncultivated,
mountainous, sandy, sterile and desolate land of Makkah and the well of Zamzam.
It, in no way, has anything to do with the cultivatable Beersheba of the Well
of Oath, which is near the S. boundary of Canaan, where Abraham frequented to
look after his herds and flocks which he had kept there.
To recapitulate and sum up the whole of the above theme, some
conspicuous points are given below:
1. There are some
interpolations, additions, deletions, and alterations in the passage, which
render the whole story quite doubtful. Any of its statement should, therefore,
be judged on its own merit after examining it critically.
2. The story depicts Sarah as
a jealous, revengeful, spiteful, and
mean-spirited woman. It is quite unbecoming and unbelievable of a lady of
Sarah’s calibre, and as such the whole of this episode looks to be a
fabrication.
3. Hagar was the
daughter of the king of Egypt and as such a princess. She was given to Abraham
and Sarah to be reared up and educated and for learning noble and godly
etiquette under the guidance of Abraham and Sarah, and to serve the family, as
an acknowledgement of its piety and godliness. She was not a ‘bondwoman’ sold
by his father, the king of Egypt. As such all the stories of Sarah’s
maltreatment to Hagar are simply fabrications. Even if Hagar had been a
slave-girl, it was not proper for Sarah’s grace to injure her feelings by
reminding her of her inferior status and to subject her to such ill
treatment.
4. When Hagar and Ishma ‘el
were settled at Beersheba, Ishma ‘el was a child of very young age which is
obvious from the clauses that Abraham: ‘took some bread and a skin of water
and, giving them to Hagar, put the child on her shoulder’; and Hagar ‘cast the
child under one of the shrubs’; and the angel of God said to Hagar, ‘lift up
the lad, and hold him in thine hand.’ On the other hand it occurred as a result
of the ‘mocking’ of Ishma ‘el to Isaac at the time of the weaning feast of
Isaac. The weaning took place when Isaac was either two years old or three.
He was younger than Ishma ‘el by fourteen years. It means that Ishma ‘el
was a youth of not less than sixteen or seventeen years at that time. Hagar
could not have ‘put him on her shoulder’ or ‘cast him under one of the shrubs’
or 'lift up the lad, and hold him in her hand.’ All this makes quite clear that
the episode of the weaning feast, in its present form, is inconsistent and
incredible; and the noble Sarah stands exonerated of all the charges of
jealousy etc., and this episode of the story is also to be rejected on
merit.
5. Abraham had abandoned
Hagar and Ishma ‘el in the wilderness
of Beersheba to be settled there under the orders of God. He should not
have worried, as he was doing it under the command of God, and he had
previously witnessed that God was the Sustainer of the family.
6. The word ‘Beersheba’
has been used at 34 places in the Bible. It is only in connection with both
Hagar and Ishma ‘el that it has been
preceded by the word ‘wilderness’. It is due to the fact that this ‘Beersheba’
is a ‘wilderness’ in true sense of word; whereas the other ‘Beersheba’ is a
green and fertile place abounding in water.
7. ‘Beersheba’ is a meaningful
word which means the ‘Well
of seven’; or the ‘Well
of seven Rounds of Running between the Mounts of al-Safa and al-Marwah
(Moriah of the Bible)’; or the ‘Well which was given to Hagar as a result of
her Seven Rounds of Running between the Mounts of al-S afa and al-Marwah’.
8. ‘Beersheba’ also means the ‘Well of Oath’, which relates to the
covenant between Abraham and Abimelech, and to the covenant between Isaac and
Abimelech, carried out in the SW end of Canaan. It has nothing to do with the
former ‘Beersheba’ or the ‘Well
of seven [Rounds of Running between the Mounts of al-S afa and
al-Marwah]’.
9. ‘Wilderness’ is the
English rendering of the Hebrew word ‘Midbar’ [in Heb. character ‘רבדמ’], which means:
‘sandy, barren, uneven, uncultivated, and mountainous land or desert’. These
qualities are promptly relevant to the ‘Beersheba’ of the ‘Well of seven’ i.e.,
Makkah and its environment. As to the ‘Beersheba’ of the ‘Well of Oath’, they cannot
be applied to it.
10. ‘Beersheba of the Well of Oath’, already existed at the place
where the oath was carried out between Abraham and Abimelech (or, in the case
of the oath between Isaac and Abimelech, it was dug out by the slaves of
Isaac); Whereas no well was visible or dug out at the site of the ‘Wilderness of Beersheba
of the Well of seven’.
It makes clear that the ‘Beersheba of the Well of Oath’ and the ‘Beersheba
of the Well of seven’
are quite different places. The ‘Beersheba of the Well of seven’ is the ‘Well of Zamzam’, which was
given to Hagar as a result of her running seven times between the hillocks of
al-Safa and alMarwah in search of water.
***********************************************************************
296 Chambers
Biographical Dictionary explains (p.1633):
Sarah, whose name means
‘princess’ in Hebrew, was the wife of Abraham and mother of Isaac. She
accompanied Abraham from Ur to Canaan (Gen 12-23) and pretended to be Abraham’s
sister before Pharaoh in Egypt and Abimelech in Gerar, since her beauty and
their desire for her might have endangered Abraham’s life. Pharaoh took her as
his wife, and Abraham prospered, but when the truth was revealed, Pharaoh
banished them both [stress added]. Long barren, she eventually gave birth to
Isaac in her old age, fulfilling God’s promise that she would be the ancestor
of nations (Gen 17.16). She died at the age of 127 in Kiriath-arba.
This account of Sarah has been reproduced to show how shameful a
character is depicted of the great patriarch.
297 New
Shorter Oxf. Eng. Dic., 1:325 s.v. ‘Canaan’ explains: Ancient name of western
Palestine, promised in the OT and Hebrew Scriptures to the children of Israel
(Exod. 3:17 etc.)
298 Chambers Essential English Dic., 1998, p. 1115 explains:
A mother weans her baby
when she gradually stops feeding it with milk from her breast and gives it
increasing amounts of other kinds of food.
R. J. Clifford and R. E. Murphy have noted in their commentary to
the book of Genesis in ‘The New Jerome Bible Com.’, ed. R. E. Brown, etc,
(Bangalore: T.P.I., 1994), 24:
The age of weaning was three
years.
The Soncino Chumash, a Jewish Commentary to the Torah, p.103, has
quoted Rabbi Shelomoh Yitschaki (1040-1105) that it took place ‘At the age of
two years.’ J. Hastings Dic. of Bible., 2:277 explains:
[In Gen. 21] We are told of the birth of Isaac (vv.
1-7). On the occasion of the festival which was held perhaps two or three years
later.
In its Vol. I, it has been told by H. A. White (p.301):
It was not fully weaned for
two or three years. It shows that a
child was weaned at the age of two or three years.
According to Gen. 16:16:
Abraham was eighty-six years
old when Hagar bore him Ishmael.
According to Gen. 21:5:
Abraham was a hundred years
old when his son Isaac was born to him.
It means that there is a
difference of fourteen years in the ages of the two brothers; and when Isaac is
said to be weaned, his elder brother, Ishm a‘el, should have been a teenager of
sixteen (14+2) or seventeen (14+3) years. Having grown up in open-air tough
life and fed mainly on milk and meat, he would have been a stout, strong, and
sturdy youth. But according to the forthcoming verses he looks to be a suckling
baby or having just been weaned. These self-contradictory statements make the
weaning feast episode incredible. The commentators of the Bible have also noted
the discrepancy. Eugene H. Maly, in his
commentary on the book of Genesis in The Jerome Bible Com., p. 22, notes:
From 17:25 and 21:8 we can
deduce that Ishmael would be about 16 years old, which clashes with the present
account (cf. vv. 1417).
It shows that the
statements of the Bible about the age of Ishma‘el at the time of his being
settled in the wilderness
of Beersheba/Paran are self-contradictory. One should, therefore, judge
every part of the story analytically on its own merit.
299 This phrase explicitly signifies that Ishma ‘el was the son of
Hagar, whom she had born unto Abraham, and Sarah had no right to claim him her
son. Whereas it is noted: Now Sarai,
Abram's wife, had borne him no children. And she had an Egyptian maidservant
whose name was Hagar. 2 So Sarai said to Abram, ‘See now, the LORD has
restrained me from bearing children. Please, go in to my maid; perhaps I shall
obtain children by her.’ [How queer that a lady can ‘obtain children by’ some other lady for
herself!] And Abram heeded the voice of Sarai. 3 Then Sarai, Abram's wife, took
Hagar her maid, the Egyptian, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife,
after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan. (Gen.
16:1-3
NKJV). So he went in to Hagar, and she conceived. (…).
And when Sarai dealt harshly with her, she fled from her presence.
[So Sarai ill-treated her and she ran away (Gen. 16:6 NEB)]. (…).
And the Angel of the Lord said to her: ‘Behold, you are with
child. And you shall bear a son. You shall call his name Ishmael, because the
Lord has heard your affliction [‘ill-treatment’ (Gen. 16:11 NEB)].’ (…).
So Hagar bore Abram a son; and Abram named his son, whom Hagar
bore, Ishmael. (Nelson Study Bible, Gen. 16:1,3,4,6,11,15; p. 33f).
This statement does not seem to be true. As is explained in a
later footnote (302) on ‘bondwoman’ of v 10, Hagar was not Sarah’s
maidservant. She was a princess and was offered to Abraham by her father, the
king of Egypt, to be his wife. [see Chapter II, footnote No. 19 above] Even if
she was a maidservant of Sarah, she had ceased to be so when Sarah gave her to
Abraham as his wife. It is a matter of natural Justice that the status of
motherhood should go only to that lady, who actually gives birth to the child
in question. No woman, who is not the actual mother of the child, should be
allowed to usurp the motherhood of this child from the woman who physically
gave birth to it. No lady, irrespective of her social status, should be allowed
to exploit another lady, who happens to be poor, weak or helpless. Whosoever
commits this heinous act is a cruel criminal. Had there been any such unjust
local tradition contrary to this natural justice, it was not desirable and
becoming of the patriarch prophet Abraham to follow it. He ought to have
amended it according to the canons of divine and natural justice. A prophet of
Abraham’s status is not meant to follow the prevailing inequities of the
society. He is sent to root out all the inequities and establish and maintain
divinely natural justice in the whole of his jurisdiction, not to say of his
own family. So the above story cannot be treated as correct; and, by all canons
of justice and equity, Ishma`el was the genuine and legitimate first-born son of
Abraham from his legitimate wife Hagar, enjoying full rights of a first-born
son. On the Biblical clause ‘Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no
children’ Nelson Study Bible (p. 33)
remarks:
In the world of the OT,
infertility caused great distress (see 25:21).
At that time, the woman was always blamed. When a woman was not able to
conceive a child, her husband might divorce her.
Had Abraham observed the customs of the time, he would have
unjustly punished Sarah by divorcing her on the charge of infertility, for
which she was not to blame according to natural justice. It shows that (i)
Ishma ‘el was Abraham’s legitimate son from Hagar for all purposes; (ii) Hagar
was Abraham’s legitimate wife when she gave birth to Ishma ‘el; and it can only
be mala fide asserted that she did not enjoy the full status of a wife. (iii)
It is baseless to claim that Ishma ‘el did not hold the full status of being
Abraham’s son. As a Prophet of the Lord, Abraham was not bound to; and did not
observe; and was not supposed to observe; the unjust customs of the prevailing
pagan societies. It was rather mandatory for him to change all such
oppressive customs.
300 The New Jerome Bible Com., 24 here observes:
with
her son Isaac: This phrase seems to have dropped out of the MT by haplography [the inadvertent
writing once, of what should have been written twice (The
Chambers Dic., 1995, s.v. ‘haplography’ p.762)]; the phrase is preserved by the LXX and
the Vg [Vulgate, i.e. the Latin Version].
It shows a form of ‘omission’ in the text of the Bible by its
redactors. Such errors are not an uncommon phenomenon in the Bible.
Another
point to be noted under the word translated here as ‘mocking’ is that in Hebrew
it is קחצ, i.e., in Arabic characters, s +h +q = ‘s ah aqa’ or ‘zah aqa’,
or exactly transliterated ‘d ah aka’. There does not exist the letter ‘d ’ in
the Hebrew alphabet; and it uses the letter ‘s ’ in lieu of it. According to
the Strong’s Dic. of Heb. Bible entry. 6711, p. 99, it
means, as a prim. root: to laugh outright (in merriment or scorn); by impl. to
sport: laugh, mock, play, make sport.
That’s why Gunther Plaut’s ‘The Torah, A Modern Com.’ p.139 translates
it:
Sarah
saw the son, whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham, playing.
Some of the other translations of the Bible have also used here
the word ‘playing’ instead of ‘mocking’, e.g., New Jerusalem Bible,
NOAB [it writes here ‘playing with her son Isaac’ and gives in note ‘g’
below ‘Gk Vg: Heb lacks with her son Isaac.’], The Torah MT, NAB, RSV (Catholic
edn.), TEV, GNB, New Catholic Com. on Holy Scripture, Soncino Chumash [making
sport], etc. The Wycliffe Bible Com., (1987), p.26, has explained the episode
as follows:
It
has been translated ‘mocking’, ‘sporting’, ‘playing’, and ‘making sport.’ There
is no good reason here to introduce the idea of mocking. What Ishmael was doing
does not matter so much as the fact that it infuriated Sarah. Perhaps she
simply could not bear to see her son playing with Ishmael as with an equal. Or
it may be that green-eyed [‘green-eyed’ was used by Shakespeare in Othello 3:3
to mean ‘very jealous’] jealousy took full control. Sarah may have feared that
Abraham, out of love for Ishmael, would give the older lad the prominent place
in the inheritance.
How grimly the character of noble Sarah has been depicted. It is
quite unbecoming of the lady, who has left her homeland and her family; and who
has undertaken the troublesome journeys of thousands of miles for the sake of
her faith and her loyalty to her husband; and for whose protection God had done
miracles: that she would treat so ruthlessly to the second wife of her husband
and the mother of her husband’s son. And, moreover, that she would so indifferently
injure the feelings of her godly husband at his such an old age. It is quite
unbelievable and renders this part of the story as fabricated.
301 Eugene H. Maly has noted here in the Jerome Bible Com., 22:
Ancient
law ordinarily forbade the expulsion of a slave wife and her child, and no
justification for it is indicated here as in 16:4; Abraham accordingly
hesitates (v.11).
But the redactor of the Bible does not hesitate to smear Abraham
with the innocent blood of this so-called ‘slave wife and her child’ by
throwing them out of his door helplessly, possibly to fall a victim to any
quite foreseeable misfortune. It means that Abraham not only 301 violates
the natural and religious duties towards his child and his wife and acts
ruthlessly and inhumanely, but also disregards the prevailing ancient laws,
which were genuinely good to be observed to the letter, as the may be
formulated by some prohet. Can a man on earth believe it?
302 It looks not to be true that Hagar was a maid, or a slave-girl,
or a bond-woman of Sarah. She was a princess, being the daughter of the
Egyptian king, who offered her to Abraham to serve him and his wife Sarah, and
to be brought and reared up in a pious atmosphere. She had been purposely
described by the redactors of the Bible as a slave girl, as can be appreciated
from the following excerpts:
That
Hagar appears as a slave-woman is a necessary consequence of the theory on
which the Hebrew myth is based, the notion being that Ishma‘el was of inferior
origin. (Enc. Biblica, p. 1933).
It purports that slavery was attributed to Hagar to prove Ishma
‘el inferior to Isaac. Whereas the fact is that she was an Egyptian princess;
as is clear from the following quotation of the Jewish Encyclopedia:
According
to the Midrash (Gen. R. xiv.), Hagar was the daughter of Pharaoh, who, seeing
what great miracles God had done for Sarah’s sake (Gen. xii, 17), said: ‘It is
better for Hagar to be a slave in Sarah’s house than mistress in her own.’ In
this sense Hagar’s name is interpreted as ‘reward’ (‘Ha-Agar’ = ‘this is
reward’). (…). Hagar is held up as an example of the high degree of godliness
prevalent in Abraham’s time, (…). Her fidelity is praised, for even after
Abraham sent her away she kept her marriage vow, (…). Another explanation of the
same name is ‘to adorn,’ because she was adorned with piety and good deeds
(l.c.). (Jewish Enc., 6:138).
H. E. Ryle has also reproduced the same opinion in his article on
‘Hagar’:
Rashi,
in his commentary on 6:1, records the belief that Hagar was a daughter of
Pharaoh, who, after seeing the wonders that had been done for Sarah, declared
that it was better for his daughter to be a bondservant in the house of Abraham
than a mistress in the palace of another. (J. Hastings, Dic. of Bible, 2:278.)
303
The New Jerome Bible Com.,
here observes:
Sarah in her anger brands her rival ‘that slave woman and her
son,’ not even mentioning their names (p. 24).
It depicts Sarah so spiteful a woman, as cannot be believed and
the story based on it cannot be treated as credible one. The following excerpt
shows what natural but shameful and unbelievable conclusions the scholars of
the Bible draw from these verses. Jewish Enc. explains:
Sarah took revenge (Gen. xvi) by
preventing her intercourse with Abraham, by whipping her with her slipper, and
by exacting humiliating services, such as carrying her bathing-materials to the
bath (l.c.); she further caused Hagar by an evil eye to miscarry, and Ishma‘el,
therefore, was her second child. (Jewish Enc., 6: 138). What
an ugly fabrication! Only a devil can believe it! It shows the unbelievable
mean-spiritedness of Sarah towards Hagar and her sonIshma ‘el; of which, even
some learned Christian scholars are forced to blame her (see next footnote).
304 The Collegeville Bible
Com., OT, ed. Dianne Bergant, 1992, observes:
It
is Sarah’s jealousy, not Hagar’s arrogance, that leads her to demand that
Abraham expel the two. She fears that Isaac’s future inheritance is threatened
by Ishmael’s presence in the home. (p.60).
This is obviously unjust
and cannot be expected from noble Sarah. Itrenders the story unbelievable. Some
heart-rending excerpts are afforded here from the Expositor’s Bible, which pose
a serious questionmark to the credibility of the story:
The
act of expulsion was itself unaccountably harsh. (…). There may have been some
law giving Sarah absolute power over her maid; but if any law gave her power to
do what was now done, it was a thoroughly barbarous one, and she was a
barbarous woman who used it. It was one of those painful cases in which one
poor creature, clothed with a little brief authority, stretches it to the
utmost in vindictive maltreatment of another. Sarah happened to be mistress,
and, instead of using her position to make those under her happy, she used it
for her own convenience, for the gratification of her own spite, and to make
those beneath her conscious of her power by their suffering. (…). She breathed
freely when Hagar and Ishmael were fairly out of sight. A smile of satisfied
malice betrayed her bitter spirit. No thought of the sufferings to which she
had committed a woman who had served her well for years, who had yielded
everything to her will, and who had no other natural protector but her, no
glimpses of Abraham’s saddened face, visited her with any relentings. It
mattered not to her what came of the woman and the boy to whom she really owed
a more loving and careful regard than to any except Abraham and Isaac. It is a
story often repeated. One who has been a member of the household for many years
is at last dismissed at the dictate of some petty pique [i.e. ‘a
feeling of annoyance and displeasure, esp. caused by the hurting of one’s
pride.’ (Longman’s Dic. of Eng. Language and Culture, 1992, p. 999)] or
spite [i.e. to deliberately annoy or upset someone] as remorselessly and
inhumanly as a piece of old furniture might be parted with. Some thoroughly
good servant, who has made sacrifices to forward his employer’s interest, is at
last, through no offence of his own, found to be in his employer’s way, and at
once all old services are forgotten, all old ties broken, and the authority of
the employer, legal but inhuman, is exercised. It is often those who can least
defend themselves who are thus treated; no resistance is possible, and also,
alas! the party is too weak to face the wilderness on which she is thrown out,
and if any [i.e. any one] cares to follow her history, we may find her at the last gasp
under a bush. Still, both for Abraham and for Ishmael it was better this
severance should take place. (….). For Ishmael himself, too, wronged as he was
in the mode of his expulsion, it was yet far better that he should go. (…). All
he required to call out his latent powers was to be thrown thus on his own
resources. (…). But the two fugitives are soon reminded that, though expelled
from Abraham’s tents and protection, they are not expelled from his God.
Ishmael finds it true that when father and mother forsake him, the Lord takes
him up. At the very outset of his desert life he is made conscious that God is
still his God, mindful of his wants, responsive to his cry of distress. (…).
God still ‘heard the voice of the lad, and the angel of God called to Hagar out
of heaven.’ It is this voice of God to Hagar that so speedily, and apparently once
for all, lifts her out of despair to cheerful hope. It would appear as if her
despair had been needless; at least from the words addressed to her, ‘What
aileth thee, Hagar?’ (….). When Ishmael turned his back on the familiar tents,
and flung his last gibe at Sarah, he was really setting out to a far richer
inheritance, so far as this world goes, than ever fell to Isaac and his
sons. [The Expositor’s Bible
{a Com. in 25 Volumes}, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll (NY: A. C. Armstrong & Son, 1903), 1: 214-15,
17-19].
Of course this account of the mistreatment of a lady and the
misfortunes of the other is a beautifully composed, well-worded, heartending piece
of literature; but on the other hand, this is all unbelievable. It depicts
Sarah as a cruel, jealous, short tempered, ill mannered and a mean-spirited
woman; which is unbecoming to a lady for whom God had done so great miracles,
and who remained extremely faithful towards her husband during all the years of
his troublesome migratory journeys. It also depicts Abraham to be unjustly
neglectful to his responsibilities towards his firstborn son and the mother of
this son, playing in the hands of the stepmother of this boy. Thus there
remains no doubt that this is unbelievable and a fabrication of some redactor.
Being the noble ‘life partner’ (an eastern version of
‘wife’, as the marriage was considered as a life long bondage there) of
the patriarch Abraham, Sarah must have been a generous and kind-hearted lady.
Having been established that the story is quite incredible, it can be safely
concluded that Ishma ‘el was not an outcast due to the jealousy of his
stepmother. It was rather the design of the Lord to plant a center and a
mission of monotheism in the heart of Arabia. At the same time it was a trial
of the devotion of Abraham and a sort of trial and training for Hagar and Ishma
‘el to inculcate in them the trust and faith in God. God consoled Abraham that
He shall not leave the child and his mother uncared-for or let them perish in
the wilderness. Rather, as ‘Allen P. Ross’ puts it in ‘The Bible Knowledge
Com.’, (Illinois: Victor Books, 1985), p. 63:
God
assured Abraham that Ishmael would have a future because he too was Abraham’s
offspring (vv. 11-13).
305 The New Jerome Bible Com. here observes (p. 24):
The
peaceful playing of the two boys stirs in Sarah deep feelings of anxiety about
her own son’s inheritance, since both boys are sons of Abraham. (…), she wants
Isaac alone to be the heir of the grand promises. It is unbelievable that Sarah may be so
malicious, envious, unjust, and selfish. In fact, Isaac was not even born as
yet, and Sarah was still to be considered as a barren old woman. This statement
of the Bible is full of inconsistencies and ambiguities.
306 The Nelson Study Bible has noted on p. 43:
But
even in that culture it was reprehensible to send Ishmael away. When a
surrogate wife had borne a son to one’s husband, that mother and child could
not be dismissed even if the first wife subsequently gave birth to a son. This
partly explains Abraham’s reluctance to do what Sarah demanded.
B. Vawter has also expressed similar observations in ‘A New
Catholic Com. on Holy Scripture’, p. 193:
Sarai
did not have the right to send Hagar away, since Ishmael was Abraham’s heir.
It further observes on p.195:
However,
for a jealous mother, it sufficed to see her son together with the slave-girl’s
on a position of equality for her to demand the expulsion of Hagar and her
child. If the situation presupposed is that which seems to underlie ch 16, then
Sarah did not have the right to drive Hagar away; see on 16:1-6. As contrary to
established social custom.
How can one believe that a pious lady of Sarah’s calibre and the
life partner of the great prophet, Abraham, could have committed so heinous an
offence! Should anybody take it as a fact or a fable?
The New Jerome Bible Com., has genuinely felt:
To
Abraham, the natural father of Ishma‘el, Sarah’s ultimatum causes great pain. (p.24). A pious and Godfearing lady cannot injure her
husband’s feelings in this manner. It again weakens the credibility of the
incident.
308 It means that God appreciates the natural affectionate grievance
of Abraham towards his son Ishma ‘el, and consoles him that there is no reason
to be worried. When you are doing it under My command, you should rest assured
that I will not forsake him to get perished. It also shows that Abraham loved
his ‘firstborn’ and the ‘only son’ very much.
309 It shows that Abraham had all the natural and due concern and
regard towards Hagar. Then how could he have put her at the mercy of her
ruthless rival?
310 LXX, Vulgate, Samaritan Pentateuch, and Syriac Bible record the
word ‘great’ before the word ‘nation’, which has been omitted here. It is one
of the examples of the intentional alterations of the redactors of the Bible.
New Jerome Bible Com. Records:
Besides,
from Ishmael ‘a great (LXX, Vg, Sam,
Syr) people’ will come forth. (p.24).
The wording of the New Jerusalem Bible is:
But
the slave-girl’s son I shall also make into a great nation, for he too is your
child. (p.40).
Some of the other translations of the Bible have also inserted the
word ‘great’ with the word ‘nation’, e.g., The Wycliffe Bible Com., CEV, Knox,
New Jerusalem Bible, NEB, NAB, Collegeville Bible Com., etc.
The omission of ‘great’ by some redactors is to be noted.
311 The following sentences of the Bible be carefully noted:
(…)
for in Isaac shall thy seed be called. And also of the son of the bondwoman
will I make a [great] nation, because he is thy seed.
What do the words ‘for in Isaac shall thy seed be called’
signify? What the difference is between
this and the next sentence, i.e.
And
also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a [great] nation, because he is
thy seed.
If someone says that it is only Isaac in whom Abraham’s seed is to
be called and not in Ishma ‘el, then it can be asked whether Ishma ‘el was not
a legitimate seed of Abraham. How can two similar sentences like these signify
different meanings?
312 The Hebrew word for this ‘bottle’ is ‘chemeth’ which means ‘a
skin’, as translated by New Jerusalem Bible etc. Strong’s Concise Heb. Bible
Dic. (entry 2573, p.41) says: ‘a skin bottle’. While explaining the word
‘bottle’, Smith’s Dic. of Bible (p. 95) writes:
The
Arabs keep their water, milk and other liquids in leathern bottles. These are
made of goatskins. When the animal is killed they cut off its feet and its
head, and draw it in this manner out of the skin without opening its belly.
313 Some of the other Translations:
(i) and took bread and a skin of water, and gave it to Hagar,
putting it on her shoulder, along with the child–RSV Catholic edn., 16;
(ii) gave bread and a skin bag of water. He put the child on her
back–CCB, 72;
(iii) took some bread and a skin of water and, giving them to
Hagar, put the child on her shoulder–New Jeru. Bible, 40;
(iv) and took bread and a skin of water, and gave it to Hagar,
putting it on her shoulder, along with the child, –NOAB, 26;
(v) took some bread and a skin of water, and gave them to Hagar.
He placed them over her shoulder, together with the child,—The Torah (A new
trans. of the Holy Scriptures according to the Masoretic text, Philadelphia:
1967), p. 34.
How could it be that poor Hagar could carry the load of a bag of
bread, a water-skin full of water, and, in addition to it, a boy of seventeen
(If the statement of the Bible, that this incident took place after the weaning
feast of Isaac, be taken as true, Ishma ‘el would have been seventeen at that
time)! And how could it be that Abraham, that pious, God-fearing, hospitable,
and kind-hearted old patriarch and prophet, became so cruel towards his own
second wife and the mother of his firstborn son! And how could it be that the
son, a young man of seventeen years’ age, instead of extending a helping hand
to his kind mother, added insult to her injuries; and plunged onto her
shoulder! Isn’t it all a scandal for character assassination of the pious and
noble personalities of Sarah, Abraham, and Ishma ‘el? Just incredible! A
footnote of The New American Bible (Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, 1987,
p. 20) on these verses would show how freely the corrections (or corruptions)
and interpolations had been made in the text of the Bible by its redactors to
make it agreeable to their whims:
Placing
the child on her back: the phrase is translated from an emended form of the
Hebrew text. In the current faulty Hebrew text, Abraham put the bread and the
waterskin on Hagar’s back, while her son apparently walked beside her. This
reading seems to be a scribal attempt at harmonizing the present passage with
the data of the Priestly source, [stress added] in
which Ishmael would have been at least fourteen years old when Isaac was born;
(…). But in the present Elohist story Ishmael is obviously a little boy, not
much older than Isaac.
314 It is quite unnatural that Abraham would have ‘cast out’ his
beloved son, Ishma ‘el, and his mother, Hagar, so helplessly to wander in the
wilderness on the orders of his wife, Sarah, the rival of Hagar. He was rather
supposed to maintain justice between his wives, being the herald of justice and
clemency from the Lord. Noble Sarah could also not have been so cruel as to ask
his husband to perform such an inhumane act. In fact it was under the command
of God that Abraham had accordingly planted a ‘would be’ center of monotheism
in the heart of Arabia. And it was predetermined that Ishma ‘el should be
brought up independently in an open and destitute atmosphere to observe of
himself the protections and provisions of God: that may inculcate in him the
will to surrender himself before God, even if He requires him to offer himself
for sacrifice. Since Abraham had done all this under the command of God, and,
of course, with His Blessings, he had not to worry about the future of the lad
and his mother. God consoled Abraham that He shall not leave the child and his
mother uncared-for or let them perish in the wilderness. Rather, as Allen P.
Ross puts it in The Bible Knowledge Com., p. 63:
God
assured Abraham that Ishmael would have a future because he too was Abraham’s
offspring (vv. 11-13).
Abraham had earlier unhesitatingly plunged himself into the pyre
(that otherwise was tantamount to suicide, which is not permissible in any
religion or code of life) and had abandoned his homeland for his divine cause
unflinchingly; and had observed great wonders of God therein. So he should not
have been worried about the future of his beloved ‘only son’ and his mother
when he was doing it under the unequivocal command of his Lord. It figures this
part of the story as nothing more than a fable.
315 i.e. bewildering, dreadful, desolate, barren, and mountainous
land around Beer-sheba (the Well
of seven).
316 Had Ishma ‘el been a grown up youth of 16 or 17 years, how Hagar
could have ‘cast the child under one of the shrubs’. It makes it decisively
clear that the event of settling Ishma ‘el and Hagar at Beersheba took place in
the childhood of Ishma ‘el and the story of the weaning feast and the alleged
jealousy of Sarah has no ground.
317 It means that Ishma ‘el was not left alone and ‘uncared-for’. If
his father had left him there, and that too under the command of God, God
Himself was very much there as his Protector and
Sustainer.
318 It might not have been the angel of God, but God Himself who
called to Hagar. It is a sort of alteration made by the redactors of the Bible.
A New Catholic Com. on Holy Scripture, p.193, has pointed out:
Here and in 9f reference is made to the ‘angel of Yahweh’, while
in 13 the Person who speaks to Hagar is identified with Yahweh himself. By some
this is explained by assuming that in the most primitive form of the story the
speaker was Yahweh himself, and only later out of reverence the word ‘angel’
was inserted in some places (…). However, it is doubtful in these ancient times
whether the Israelites thought of the ‘angel of Yahweh’ as personage distinct
from Yahweh himself. The ‘angel’ (malak), lit. ‘messenger’ was rather Yahweh
himself made manifest to man.
Eugene H. Maly has also
observed in the Jerome Bible Com., (p. 22):
The versions have the correct reading, as in the CCD
[Confraternity of Christian Doctrine Trans. of the Bible]. ‘God heard’ is a
play on the child’s name (cf. 16:11), but, to avoid the anthropomorphism, E.
has ‘the angel of God’ speak to Hagar.
It shows that it was God
Himself who addressed Hagar, but the redactor, out of his personal estimate of
Hagar or some other considerations, changed it to ‘angel of Yahweh’.
319 How lucky this Hagar is as to be addressed directly by God
Himself [but according to this corrupted version ‘by the angel of the Lord’]
out of heaven!
320 Doesn’t it reveal the great love and concern of the Lord for
Hagar?
Is this exile a curse or a blessing for noble Hagar?
321 For God Himself is there to protect you from all kinds of danger.
He is aware of all of your needs, conditions, and impending hardships: and He
would provide you and your son everything you require.
322 It again reveals the love
and concern of the Lord towards Ishma ‘el.
323 Had Ishma ‘el been a grown up youth of 16 or 17 years, how Hagar
could have lifted him up and held him in her hand! It shows that the event of
settling Ishma ‘el and Hagar at Beersheba took place in the childhood of Ishma
‘el and the story of the weaning feast and the alleged jealousy of God-fearing
and noble Sarah has no ground.
324 Had Ishma ‘el been a young man of 16 or 17 years, it should have
been he, not the old lady—his mother Hagar—who should have done all these
pieces of work. It too helps the reader to ascertain the age of Ishma ‘el at
the time of his being settled at the wilderness of Beersheba and Paran. It has also some bearing upon
the credibility of this part of the story.
325 God repeatedly shows His concern for Ishma ‘el. How could this
boy have been perished and why need Abraham worry about him when God was with
him all the time to protect and rear him up (which fact He Himself asserts in
unequivocal terms)!
326 The ‘Paran’ mentioned here is the name of Makkah. It has been
discussed in detail by the writer of this book somewhere else (but not in the
present book). These verses show that Ishma ‘el would have been a suckling baby
or about to be weaned when he was sent away to Paran or Beer-sheba, otherwise
Hagar could not have ‘put the child on her shoulder’ or ‘lifted up the lad, and
held him in her hand’ or ‘cast the child under one of the shrubs’. It renders
the so-called weaning feast of Isaac as a baseless fabrication. As a result of
it:
(a)
Ishma ‘el could not have been there to allegedly mock his younger brother. It
is clearly recorded in the Bible that Ishma ‘el was a child of such a young age
that his mother could lift him up. Therefore the question of the presence of Isaac
at that place does not arise. Isaac was not even born by that time. He was born
when Ishma ‘el had already attained the age of fourteen years. (b) The noble Sarah stands exonerated from
all the blames of jealousy, cruelty, and brutality.
327 Gen. 21:8-21 KJV.
328 New Jerusalem Bible (21:41) has inserted here footnote ‘a’, as an
introductory remark:
At
this point the three traditions are fused together: vv. 1a, 2a, 7 follow on
from 18:15 and are Yahwistic; vv. 2b, 5 follow on from 17:21 and are priestly;
vv. 1b, 6 are Elohist.
Pauline A. Viviano, in The Collegeville Bible Com., 59 explains:
All
three sources are found in this account of the birth of Isaac.
329 The Collegeville Bible Com., 60 asserts:
The
Elohist narrative of Isaac’s birth (vv. 8-21) is a duplicate of the story of expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael
found in the Yehwistic version in chapter 16.
330 The Collegeville Bible Com., 60.
331 In English ‘desolate’ means ‘sad and without people, comfort,
hope, or friends, etc.’ In the Bible the original Hebrew word for it is
‘badad’, which means ‘alone, desolate, only, solitary’ (Strong’s Heb Dic.,
Entry 910, p.19).
332 Isa. 27:10 KJV.
333 Enc. Biblica, 1:1076,7.
334 The Interpreter’s Bible Dic., 5:946.
335 The Interpreter’s Bible Dic., 4:844.
336 William
Smith, A Dic. of Bible (1988), 143.
337 Harper’s Bible Dic., (1994), 1133.
338 Beersheba is a compound Hebrew word. Beer
means ; a well’; and Sheba means ‘seven’ or ‘oath’. In Hebrew script Beer Sheba
is written as: ‘עבש ראב’
339 ‘עבש ראב’:
i.e. ‘be-ayr sheh-bah’; (See Strong’s Dic. of the Heb. Bible., entry 884, p.
18.).
340 Enc. Biblica (1:518) writes: ‘i.e., “well of
seven” ’. Strong’s Dic. of Heb. Bible, (entry 884; 18) explains:
‘עבש ראב’ Beer Sheba. be-ayr’ sheh-bah; from 875 and
7651 (in the sense of 7650); ‘ראב’ be-ayr; from 874;
a pit; espec. a well.’
Entry 7651, p.112 reads as:
‘עבש’ shib`ah shib-aw`; from 7650 a prim.
cardinal number; seven ,(as the sacred full one); also (adv.) seven times; by
impl. a week; seven-fold, seventh.’
341
Covenant means: ‘the agreement between God and the Israelites’ (Oxf. Eng. Ref.
Dic., 330).
342 A
Concise Dic. of The Heb. Bible (entry 875, p.18) explains:
‘ראב’ be-ayr; from 874; a pit; espec. a
well.
Entry 874, p.18
is:
‘ראב’ ba`ar, baw-ar; a prim. Root; to dig.
Entry 7650, p.112
reads as:
‘עבש’ shaba shaw-bah; a prim. Root; to seven
oneself, i.e. swear (as if by repeating a declaration seven times): adjure, charge (by an oath, with an oath), take an oath.
The Enc. Biblica (1:518) explains:
It is taken as
meaning ‘well of the oath’. One of the Simeonite towns in the southern
territory of Judah (Josh. 19.2), on the border of the cultivated land, came to
be regarded, for the greater part of history,
as the remotest point of Canaan in that direction; whence the phrase ‘from Dan to Beersheba’.
It explains in
footnote 1 to the same page:
The Hebrew word ‘to
swear’ means literally ‘to come under the influence of seven things.’
Gen. 21:31-2,
RSV Catholic Trans., p.16:
Therefore that place
was called Beer-sheba; because there both of them swore an oath. So they made a
covenant at Beer-sheba.
343 Hastings Dic. of Bible, (Revised one vol.
Edn., 1963), 94.
344 J.
Hastings, A Dic. of Bible, 1:265.
345 John
L. McKenzie, Dic. of Bible (I984), 87.
346 See
Hastings Dic. of Bible, (Revised one vol. 1963 ed.), 375.
347 Harper’s
Bible Dic., 101.
348 F. F. Bruce, Places Abraham
Knew (London: ECIVZNJ, Scripture Union, 130 City Road, 1984), 53,55,56.
349 J. Hastings, A Dic. of the
Bible, 1:265.
350 John L. McKenzie, Dic. of
the Bible, 86 asserts:
The name is literally ‘Well of seven’.
The Interpreter’s Dic. of Bible, 1:375 (col. 2) explains:
It is the ‘Well of seven,’ (…); but in [Gen. 21] vs 31 it is apparently
the ‘well of the oath.’
7th Day Adventist Bible Dic., ed.
Siegfried H. Horn, 131 has noted:
Heb.
‘Be’er Sheba’, ‘Well of
seven’, or ‘well of an oath’.
351 The
Interpreter’s Bible 1:639 has explained:
‘Where
he is’ is an allusion to the site of the ‘well’ mentioned in vs. 19, a sacred
spot among the Ishmaelites.
And every knowledgeable person knows that it is the ‘Well of Zamzam’
which is the ‘sacred spot among the Ishmaelites.’
352 Gibb, H. A. R. and J. H. Kramer, Shorter Enc. of Islam, (Karachi:
South Asian Publishers, 1981), 508.
353 A
Lion Handbook: the World’s Religions (Herts, England: The Lion Publishing,
1984), 319,20.
354 How content and composed she is at Abraham’s reply and what
befitting response of the family of the great patriarch!
355 Dr. Muh ammad Muhsin Kha n,
Trans. of the Meanings of S ah ih
alBukhari Arb-Eng (Riya dh: Da russala m, S. A., PO Box 22743, 1997),
4:351-53.
***********************************************************************************
In addition to above regarding further historic Holy places location, there is also a recent discovery by Christian geologists/ archeologists of The Real Original Mount Sinai or Tur-e- Sina in the Quran, and also called traditionally Jebel Musa or Jebel el Lawz and also the mountain of fire where Moses had a direct conversation with ALLAH thats why Moses PBUH is called Kaleemullah. Recommeded video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mB5Aw14e4M
*************************************************************************************************
2) SCIENTIFIC / MEDICAL BENEFITS OF ZAMZAM AND ITS HEALING PROPERTIES AND ENERGY
a) Dr. Knut Pfieffer - German Scientist/Doctor of Internal medicine
b) Dr. Masaru Emoto - Japanese Scientist
c) Dr. Zaghloul - Egyptian Geologist
d) Dr. Yahya Koshak - PHD Engineering KSA
e) Ulcerative
Keratitis And Zamzam Water
f) Removal Of
Kidney Stones Without Surgery
Dr. Knut Pfeiffer, a Christian German doctor specialist in internal medicine, has discovered that Zamzam water has far more Positive Energy effect on human cells than regular drinking water from Munich, Germany.
d) Dr. Yahya Koshak - PHD Engineering KSA
e) Ulcerative
Keratitis And Zamzam Waterf) Removal Of Kidney Stones Without Surgery
ZAMZAM WATER AND THE ENERGETIC FIELDS IN HUMAN ORGANISMS
Experiments were done on Munich water and the results were although Munich water is pure in Chemical way, the energetic value of the person was well as seen in the below picture but after drinking Munich water the energy level gone down significantly i.e. Munich water stole his existing energy thats bad. Munich water has no energy.
Further experiments were done on 60 differentpersons before and 20 minutes after drinking 400ml of Zamzam water. We saw that there was a great opportunity for the response of the energetic fields in the human organisms. According to the Doctor it has nothing to do with the chemical ingredients, there is infact Energy in it and Zamzam gives you energy the energy your cells systems need thats why you are healed by it. All those 60 patients results were active like this after drinking Zamzam water. Cells love this energy.
What is Illness?
In the beginning Illness is an energetic error of information to the cellular systems.
If we could change this misinformation by using special energies, we could start with treatments so early that the physical manifestation of the cellular destruction resulting in illness will not happen!
Energetic drinks e.g. Redbull etc.. can increase your blood pressure and pulse rate little higher its a kind of energy but its not for the cell energy its like doping which is not a good energy.
Energy is the basic first thing. Chemical comes from the energy, first energy then material chemical things. Zamzam is Liquid Energetic Medicine and Energetic medicines will be the medicines of the future which muslims already have with them. Albert Einstein said E=MC2 i.e. Energy can be change into material and everything that comes out of this is everything is energy so basic is always energy. Currently since the discovery of Energy formula in 1913 our medical point of view primarily is mechanistic (surgical) or Chemical (Pill).
Uncontaminated Zam-zam has been flowing from the Ka’aba for over 4000 years. Samples taken from all water sources in the world contain some germs in it. Through studies by Doctor Yahya Koshak (expert on Zam-zam) it has been proven that Zam-zam does not contain any contaminants. It is an established scientific fact that pools or water wells tend to grow vegetation such as algae– especially in warm climates. Amazingly this is not the case in the well of Zam-zam. It has remained free from biological contaminations.
Healing Nature Scientific proof shows that Zam-zam contains healing components due to its higher content of calcium and magnesium salts and natural fluorides which present germicidal properties.
The miracle of its Origin Mecca is built on a mass of igneous rock, and due to the process in which they form, these rocks have no pores and – due to partial melting of the minerals of which the rock comprises -cause any existing pores to close up. Science tells us that water reservoirs can only exist in rocks that are highly porous and permeable. Geologist Dr Zaghloul Al-Najjar, head of The Committee of Scientific Signs in the Quran and Sunnah states that this simple and great fact verifies the sanctity and holiness of the land.
Hadith substantiates its Science Origins of the water was a mystery until tunnels were dug around Makkah, where engineers and workers found hairline fractures in the solid mass of rock that stretched for kilometers in either direction through which Zam-zam was seeping out, extensive fractures which could only be caused by a mighty impact. Sunnah states that it’s because of the strong blow with which Jibra’eel Alayhis salam struck the earth that Isma’eel Alayhis salaam was able to drink.The well isn’t that deep, 30 metres in fact of which 13 metres or a little less are filled with compressed sediments from the valley which don’t allow water to flow out. Below this is about 17 metres of igneous rock through which the water flows through these long hairline fractures in the rock, where it gains its high mineral content beneficial to both the body and soul of man.
It Manifests for what it is Drunk
The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “The water of Zamzam is for whatever it is drunk for.”
{Narrated by Ibn Maajah, 3062}
This is a hasan hadeeth. A myriad of cases exist that testify to the healing nature of Zam-zam. Drinking Zam-zam with the sincere intention of fulfilling a need, such as healing a physical ailment, being freed from poverty or distress, even achieving calm in the wake of any type of anxiety, gives way to Allah fulfilling these needs. One could continue drinking it until one is completely healed. In this video you see Dr. Zaghloul tells that how a year long bedridden boy was cured from Tetraplegia. Further there are many people healed e.g. eye-sight recovery, cure from Leukemia, breast cancer etc..
The Prophet Sallallahu alayhi wasalam used to wash his chest with Zam-zam to gain courage and relieve anxiety through Allah’s grace, before visiting the heavens; he would drink it and use it for Wudhu.
It was reported in Sahih Muslim that the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said to Abu Dhār, who had stayed near the Ka’bah and its coverings for forty days and nights with no food or drink other than (Zamzam): “How long have you been here?” Abu Dhār said, “I have been here for thirty days and nights.” The Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said, “Who has been feeding you?” He said, “I have had nothing but Zamzam water, and I have gotten so fat that I have folds of fat on my stomach. I do not feel any of the tiredness or weakness of hunger and I have not become thin.” The Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said, “Verily, it is blessed, it is food that nourishes.”
{Narrated by Imam Muslim, 2473}
{Narrated by Imam Muslim, 2473}
Water fasting.Water fasting isn’t something new, and has even been done during the time of the Prophet (Sallalahu alayhi wasalam). Revisit the hadith in point 6:
It was reported in Sahih Muslim that the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said to Abu Dhār, who had stayed near the Ka’bah and its coverings for forty days and nights with no food or drink other than (Zamzam): “How long have you been here?” Abu Dhār said, “I have been here for thirty days and nights.” The Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said, “Who has been feeding you?” He said, “I have had nothing but Zamzam water, and I have gotten so fat that I have folds of fat on my stomach. I do not feel any of the tiredness or weakness of hunger and I have not become thin.” The Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said, “Verily, it is blessed, it is food that nourishes.”
{Narrated by Imam Muslim, 2473}
{Narrated by Imam Muslim, 2473}
Some of the positive benefits of a 48 hour Zam-zam fast are an increase in the number of blood platelets and increased immunity through an increase in white blood cells, as well as a detoxifying effect on the body. Murwiya (Zam-zam) also increases hemoglobin levels, which result in increased energy levels. Testimonials state that these fasts eradicate morning breath, and hunger pangs, also providing a noticeable nourishing effect on the body.
JAPANESE SCIENTIST DR. MASARU EMOTO
Dr. Masaru Emoto, a non-Muslim Japanese scientist discovers the effect of Islamic words & symbols on water molecules. On Egyptian TV, an Egyptian scientist explains how a Japanese scientist, seated beside him, discovered the effect of the Quran, Islamic words & symbols, and the Call to Prayer (Azan) on water molecules (when observed under electronic microscopes) producing different shapes of amazing crystals, depending on the Islamic word or symbol used. Since water constitutes 70% of our body, this discovery helps explain the soothing & pleasant feeling effect on people when they hear Islamic words and they are in Islamic places of worship. For more information about Dr. Masaru Emoto, visit www.masaru-emoto.netZamZam water properties http://kaheel7.com/Book-eng/zamzamwaret.pdf Perhaps the final experiment Dr. Masaru Emoto did was on Zamzam’s water which he subjected to a stiff and fastidious test. He found out that this water is different than any other type of water on the globe. Interestingly, he noticed that this water has a special interaction and reaction with the Words of Allah, the Almighty; the Glorious Quran recitation on it. He observed the water particle taking distinct shapes that distinguish them from any other water particles’ shape in the world. Emoto brought few drops of Zamzam’s water and recited the “Basmaleh” [In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, Most Merciful] in Arabic and noticed that the arrangement of the water particles became prettier! In fact, these drops of water formed unique shapes as if they were drawn by a fantastically skilled artist.
 |
| This is a photo of Zamzam water gushing through the rocks. Zamzam water still gush non-stop since thousands of years. This is rather an amazing behavior. |
You may wonder: Does
Zarnzam water have any advantage over other kinds of water?
Yes, Zarnzam water does have an advantage
in terms of composition. A
long time ago, some Pakistani researchers
undertook research that proved this. The
Center for Haj Research undertook studies on
Zarnzam water, and found out that it is a wondrous kind of
water that differs from others. Engineer Sami , Ankawi,
president and director of the Haj Research
Center, told me that when they were digging near the spring of Zarnzam during
the recent expansion of the Haram, the more water they took from Zarnzam, the more
it gave. They operated three pumps to
remove Zarnzam water so that they could lay the foundations, then they
undertook studies on Zarnzam water from its source
to see whether there were any germs
in it, but they found
that it contained not a single germ. It was clean and pure, but some contamination from elsewhere may occur
with the use of bottles,
pipes or buckets. But it is clean
and pure and there is
nothing wrong
with it at all.
This
is one of the special qualities of
Zarnzam
water. Another of its special
qualities is that you will always find
it. It has been continually flowing
from the time of Prophet Abraham, peace
and blessings of Allah be upon him, until today. How long
do other wells last? Fifty
years, one hundred years, then their water disappears and runs out, but
this well is still flowing and
never runs out.
never runs out.
The
Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah
be upon him, said: “Zamzam water
is for that for which
it is drunk." (Narrated by Ahmad
and Ibn Majah; it is saheeh).
No doubt our Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of
Allah be upon him, has spoken the truth. I
know for certain the story of a man from Yemen with whom I am acquainted. He
is a friend of mine and he is an old man. His sight was weak because of his advanced age and he had almost lost his sight. He used to read the Qur'an a great deal and he had a small Mus-haf He did not want to give up this Mus-haf, but his sight had grown weak. What was he to do?
is a friend of mine and he is an old man. His sight was weak because of his advanced age and he had almost lost his sight. He used to read the Qur'an a great deal and he had a small Mus-haf He did not want to give up this Mus-haf, but his sight had grown weak. What was he to do?
He said, "I heard that
Zarnzam water has healing
properties, so I went to Zarnzam and started to drink from it."
1 saw him myself, taking that small Mus-haj from his pocket and opening it and reading it. Yes, by Allah, he opened it and
read it, although he had been unable to read letters bigger than those in this Mus-haj of his. He told me this after he drank Zamzam water. This is the Hadith of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, but the one who says it must be
certain that his Du'a' will be responded to.
certain that his Du'a' will be responded to.
"And when My
slaves ask you (0 Muhammad) concerning Me, then (answer them), I am indeed near
(to them by My Knowledge). I respond to the invocations of the supplicant when
he calls on Me (without any mediator or intercessor). So let them obey Me and
believe in Me, so that they may be led ariqht," (Soorah AI-Baqarah, 2:186]
ULCERATIVE
KERATITIS AND ZAMZAM WATER
A Muslim brother said, after returning from performing the obligatory Haj: A respectable lady whose name
is Yusriyah 'Abdur Rahman Harraz, who was performing Haj with us under the
auspices of the Ministry of Awqaf, told us about the miracle that happened to
her by the
blessing of Zamzam water. Many years ago she suffered a corneal ulcer in her left eye which resulted in a migraine pain that never left her by night or day, and painkillers did nothing to reduce the pain. Moreover, she had lost almost all vision in the affected eye, because there was a white film over it. She went to a senior eye doctor who confirmed that there was no way to end the pain except with an injection that would kill the pain but at the same time would permanently affect the eye, so
she would never see again.
she would never see again.
The woman was very upset by this news, but she put her trust in the mercy of Allah, the Exalted, and was certain that He would grant her the means of healing despite the doctors' view that hope was very slim.
She decided to do 'Umrah so that she would be able to seek healing directly from Allah at His sacred House.
She decided to do 'Umrah so that she would be able to seek healing directly from Allah at His sacred House.
She came to Makkah and circumambulated the Ka'bah. There were not many people doing Tawaf at that time, so she was
able, as she said, to kiss the Black Stone and touch her afflicted eye to it. Then she went to Zamzam and filled a cup, and she washed her eye with it. After that she completed Sa'i and went back to the hotel where she was staying.
After she returned to the hotel, she was surprised to note that her sick eye had become perfectly sound and that the symptoms of corneal ulcer had disappeared without a trace.
After she returned to the hotel, she was surprised to note that her sick eye had become perfectly sound and that the symptoms of corneal ulcer had disappeared without a trace.
How was the
ulcer eradicated without surgery? How could the eye for which there was no hope have been restored without any treatment?
She told her doctor about
what had happened, and all he could do was cry out from the depths of his
heart "Allahu Akbar." This woman, whom medicine had failed to treat, was
treated by the Greatest Doctor in His Divine
clinic of which His Messenger, peace and
blessings of Allah be upon him, spoke when he said: "Zamzam
water is for that for which it is drunk." (Narrated by
Ahmad and Ibn Majah; saheeh)
REMOVAL OF
KIDNEY STONES WITHOUT SURGERY
The following story, and others
that we hear or read from those who have undergone these
experiences, indicate the truth of what
the Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said
about the blessed well of Zarnzam. The
narrator of this story, Dr. Farooq' Antar,
says, "A few years ago I was diagnosed with stones in the ureter, and
doctors determined that it would be impossible to remove them except by means
of surgery, but I delayed having
surgery twice. Then Allah inspired me to perform 'Umrah and ask Him to bless me with healing and removal of
these stones without surgery."
Dr. Farooq traveled to Makkah and performed 'Umrah; he drank Zarnzam
water and kissed the Black Stone, then he prayed
two Rak'ahs (units) before
leaving the Haram. He felt a stabbing pain in the
ureter, and rushed to the washroom, where the miracle took place: A large stone came out and he was cured without having to enter the operating room. The passing of this stone was a surprise to the doctors who were treating him and watching his case.
ureter, and rushed to the washroom, where the miracle took place: A large stone came out and he was cured without having to enter the operating room. The passing of this stone was a surprise to the doctors who were treating him and watching his case.
(AI-'Ijaz AI-'Ilmi Fil-Islam Was-Sunnah An-Nabawiyah)
ZAMZAM WATER AND RECOVERY FROM CANCER
Zamzam is the best spring
water of all, and is the finest of waters. It is proved in Sunan Ibn Majah that the Prophet, peace and
blessings of Allah be upon him, said: "Zamzam water is for that for which
it is drunk."
And it is proved in Saheeh Muslim that the Prophet,
peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said to Abu Dharr, may Allah be pleased
with him, after he had stayed between the Ka'bah and its cover
for forty days with no food other than Zamzam water: "It is food that nourishes."
for forty days with no food other than Zamzam water: "It is food that nourishes."
According to other reports,
"It is food that nourishes and a healing from sickness."
Many Muslims have tried that and
proved the ability of this good water to heal many diseases by the leave of
Allah, the Exalted. This is in addition to its sweetness, freshness and ability
to strengthen the body. Zamzam still brings massive benefit to the people of
Earth on the command of its Lord, as it has done since Allah, the Almighty, caused
it to spring forth to quench the thirst of His slave and Prophet Isma' eel and
his mother Hajar, and will continue to do so until the Day
of Judgment.
of Judgment.
An amazing story happened to a Moroccan lady
called Layla Al-Helou. Cancer had spread throughout her chest and
the doctors determined that she would not live more than three months, after it was established that the cancer had
metastasized. Her husband suggested that she should travel to Makkah and
perform 'Umrah, and she did indeed travel to the holy lands and secluded
herself in the sacred House of Allah, where she persisted in drinking Zamzam
water and was content to eat alongside it just one piece of bread or one egg per
day. She spent all her time in prayer, reading Qur' an,
supplicating and beseeching Allah, may He be Glorified and Exalted.
Layla says: "For four days I could not tell
if it was night or day; I read the entire Qur' an many times, and in my prayers
I would make my prostration lengthy, weeping much for
what I had missed out on of drawing close to Allah by means
of acts of worship both obligatory and supererogatory, Dhikr and Du'a'. A few days later I noticed
that the red spots with which my body was covered had disappeared completely, and
I felt in my heart that something had happened. I decided to go back to Paris where I was
being treated, to consult the doctors. There the doctors were very surprised.
After re-examining me several times, they told me that there was no trace of
the cancer that had filled every inch of my chest! I left
them in their amazement and wonder and went back to my own country to tell
people the story of my healing."
COURTESY:
Where does Zamzam water come from, while in this barren land of a desert? http://kaheel7.com/eng/index.php/secrets-of-quran-a-sunnah/287-the-memory-of-zamzams-water
2) http://www.savap.org.pk/journals/ARInt./Vol.2(3)/2012(2.3-06).pdf
3) http://www.siasat.com/english/news/amazing-facts-zam-zam
4) http://www.darulihsan.com/index.php/news/news/item/973-news-%E2%80%98zamzam%E2%80%99-water-cures-cancer-patient
5) Muhammad Rasulullah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) said: “For whatever object Zam-Zam is drunk, that object will definitely be fulfilled. If one drinks it with the purpose of being cured, then Allaah Ta’ala will grant cure for the drinker, or if one drinks it for his thirst to be removed then Allaah Ta’ala will remove his thirst. Because it is the well of Jibraeel (alaihi salaam), and with it Allaah Ta’ala quenched the thirst of Hadhrat Ismaeel (alaihi salaam). http://www.haqislam.org/virtues-of-zam-zam-water/
6) http://www.elnaggarzr.com/en/main.php?id=6
7) http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentid=2010052673503
8) How was it possible when Makkah is about 50 miles away from the sea and the wells located before the city usually remains dry? http://www.islamicbulletin.org/newsletters/issue_22/zamzam.aspx
9) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzHX8SlJkoM
10) Islamic Medicine -The key to a better life by Yusuf Al-Hajj Ahmad (Darussalam Publications)
10) Islamic Medicine -The key to a better life by Yusuf Al-Hajj Ahmad (Darussalam Publications)
No comments :
Post a Comment