
They
have taken their rabbis and monks as lords besides
Allah,
and also the Messiah, son of Maryam.
Yet they were commanded to worship only one God.
There is no god but Him!
Glory be to Him above anything they associate with Him!
They desire to extinguish Allah’s Light with their
mouths.
But Allah refuses to do other than perfect His Light,
even though the kafirun detest it.
It is He who sent His Messenger
with guidance and the Deen of Truth
to exalt it over every other deen,
even though the mushrikun detest it.
(9:31-33)
In these blessed ayats from Surat
at-Tawba, Allah, glory be to Him, has indicated the
disastrous path that the jews and the christians have
set out upon. The essential condition of both these
parties is that to adopt their chosen stance they have
obliged themselves to deny Tawhid. Because these two
parties have set themselves against Tawhid, it follows
that they are in darkness. It is in this confusion that
the jews and the christians can never be reconciled with
each other. The result of this is an inescapable
ambiguity which sets christian against jew and jew
against christian. However, the nature of confusion is
that the situation must also contain its opposite. So it
is that in the first historical phase of the great
deviation from Tawhid that was the christian Church, the
jews were seen as the deadly enemies of the christians
since, in the central fiction on which this false
religion is founded, the jews were the executioners of
Sayyiduna ‘Isa, ‘alayhi salam. The enmity between the
two parties could not have been more profound, and
indeed manifested as that ongoing persecution of jews in
European history with cyclical expulsions from the
cities of England to the steppes of Russia, culminating
in the enormous genocide by Lutheran Germany during the
Third Reich. The Nazi doctrines which licensed
persecution were lifted directly from the ordinances of
Martin Luther himself.
A critical element
in this tortured conflict was how the two parties viewed
the interdiction on usury. The ancient religion of the
jewish people, through the prophets, forbad the practice
of usury. The modern religion, the invented christianity
of the brilliant jewish St. Paul, at its inception also
forbad usury. Christianity was of course a Reformation.
What St. Paul did was in effect to inject a reformed and
universalised judaism into the body politic of the
Greco-Roman Empire. In the place of the awaited Messiah
of the jews was offered the arrival of the Messiah,
Jesus. In the place of the awaited king of the jews was
offered the cosmic king of the Risen Christ. In the
place of the celebration of the saving of the jewish
people commemorated in the Feast of the Passover was
offered the new ritualised eating of unleavened bread.
Paul instituted the universalisation of this rite. The
unleavened bread of the communion sacrament now offered
salvation to those who partook of it. Where once the
biscuit assured the historical salvation of the jewish
race, it now magically assured spiritual salvation for
the whole human race.
To intensify the central rite of the
reformed religion was borrowed the ritualised drinking
of wine, this latter rite belonging only to an initiate
priesthood. In the ancient religion the rabbi was in
fact what you might call a holy butcher, since his
primary task was the sacrifice of animals to be eaten
according to religious law through the act of
slaughtering them in a particular way, the cutting of
the throat, and in a particular place, the Temple of
Jerusalem. So in the new religion the priest drinking
the cup of wine/blood was the indication of the prior
ritual slaughter of Jesus, now metaphysically redefined
as the Paschal Lamb. Thus the kosher lamb of lunch had
become the life-giving Lamb of God. This borrowed
adaptation by Paul of the well-known Roman religious
practice of priests eating the flesh and drinking the
blood of a dead king in order that his power should pass
to them assured an anthropological profundity and a
traditional resonance.
This provided the central ritual of
the reformed judaism. Reformed judaism had to perform
two duties. Firstly, free the jews from the stringent
system of Divine Law. Secondly, compensate for the
abolition of the social and moral rulings with a
metaphysical assurance of safety from Divine punishment
that would follow from breaking the Law by the ingestion
of the Saviour’s flesh and blood which then purified the
believer and absolved those wrong actions that he had
been freed to do by abandoning the Law. Since the
abandoning of moral and civic law was anti-rational, the
liberation from it could not be justified rationally and
so had to be licensed by a Mystery and by a transfer of
belief from belief in the Creator to a belief in a
negotiating divinity, a mediating metaphysical reality —
Man-made-God! ‘Hic est corpus...broken for you—take, eat
and drink...’ The enshrouding mystery was that the
initiate priesthood, the bishops or presbyter in the old
Greek, were necessary for the transformation of the
bread and wine into flesh and blood. The doctrine was
later defined as transubstantiation. Historically
speaking it was a brilliant cocktail, uniting as it did
the Unitarian element of old judaism with a central rite
from old pagan Europe. Certainly, at its inception, the
First Reformation was a great success and was certainly
a prime mover in bringing down both the Roman Empire and
the Viking civilisation.
The fatal mixture of a great truth
and a great lie obviously could not survive, the truth
being the reality of Sayyiduna ‘Isa, and the lie being
that the Reformed Rite of the Passover could save the
individual from the judgment of God. As the deception
began to unravel, men began to realise that the doctrine
of a god which entailed the absorption into it of a
man-become-god could not survive the cool glance of
reason. The solution of the Church was very simple—if
you did not believe in the Trinity you had to be burnt
at the stake. So it was that historically christianity
found itself assailed on the one hand by the Unitarian
simplicity of the prior jewish religion, and on the
other by the anterior movement of Greek philosophy and
its practice of rational enquiry. So it was that as the
centuries passed, these two menacing groups became
increasingly persecuted, the jews for having crucified
(in the christian construct) Jesus, and the academics
for the ultimate heresy on christianity, to declare, ‘It
does not make sense.’
Historically, it was the second part
of the equation that was finally to undo the ‘Eternal’
Church of Rome. There then followed the Second
Reformation. In that sense, the Second Reformation
actually represented a divorce from the Pauline heresy
and the return to judaic formulae. No-one examining the
theological literature before and after the Second
Reformation can fail to see that the deconstruction of
the Sacrament meant the reconstruction of the Old
Testament prophetic tradition, or you could say, Isaiah
took over from the Gospel of St. John. At the same time
that the Second Reformation was freeing itself from its
sacrificial rituals, it was also being given licence to
practice usury, thus in a sense freeing itself from both
the prior religions.
The Second Reformation achieved two
vital ‘modernisations’ of christianity. Firstly, both
Luther and Calvin not only sanctioned but encouraged
usury as a mercantile principle. Secondly, in abolishing
the elite power of initiated bishops, that is, the only
ones who could turn the bread and wine into flesh and
blood, they replaced them with a teaching class of
academics. Put it another way, the great network of
monks and monasteries which had been the venous system
of European civilisation was replaced by a network of
professors and universities. The initiating Bishop
became the educating Presbyter—in fact these terms were
synonymous, one from the Latin, one from the Greek—but
the situation was the same.
There then followed what we may term
the Third Reformation. It consisted of an open
declaration of atheism, the new religion whose reforming
task was the abolition of anointed kings and empowered
priests. Kingship structurally represented the two
earlier religions, judaism and christianity. The
coronation ceremony entailed the anointing of the king,
a ritual pertaining to the kings of Israel and being
installed with the Orb and Sceptre indicating the joint
rulership of Church and Kingdom. The civic role of the
christian priest, Catholic or Protestant, was replaced
with the educating teacher, who had taken on that
authority and so was named Domine, the Latin for Lord.
This Third Reformation reached its climax in a process
whose name, far from indicating the triumphant rule of
reason and thus the end of religion, rather indicated a
completely new religion.
The name of the final Reformation was
the Enlightenment. Whereas the prior religion was
compounded, part Truth part lie, the Enlightenment,
declaring as it did the end of religion itself, was
therefore itself the Great Lie. Enlightenment whose
credo was the elevation of the rational discourse and
critical analysis, at the same time set itself up on a
metaphysical basis of spiritual superiority over the
religions of worship and gratitude to the Divine. The
new religion was to be nothing less than the worship of
Man.
One of its high priests, Rousseau,
had grudgingly admitted that for the doctrine of
humanism to survive the element of worship could not be
denied. So it was that in a blood-bath unparalleled in
the excesses of the previous religions, in the midst of
the Terror, Robespierre declared a new religion, the
Worship of the Supreme Being, a worship totally devoid
of any moral or civic content, and that in turn meant no
prohibition on usury. The new religion of the Supreme
Being, a mere concept, and one voided of moral content,
was introduced with a new calendar abolishing the
christian dating and replacing it with a Year One of the
French Revolution, and was accompanied by mass
slaughter. In every city in France guillotines were set
up. Several in the larger cities, many in Paris. In one
town the wives and daughters of men thought to be
against democracy and the Rights of Man were dragged to
the guillotine in front of the whole town, and with the
paving stones around the guillotine painted red to mask
the blood of the women and children. Humanism and the
Enlightenment were launched upon the world.
The Enlightenment spread darkness
over the whole earth, and from that moment it began to
die. Species after species were to vanish from the face
of the earth due to the now encouraged doctrine of
usury, that is, banking. The air became toxic. And the
great oceans began to putrefy with the vanishing of the
cleansing species. Two cataclysmic World Wars not only
wiped out millions but also smothered the memory and the
echo of civic order that had once been the patrimony of
the human creature, now deified and doomed.
Against this background and its
turmoil the christians made a desperate attempt to
survive and to avoid what was clearly the end of their
religion in its doctrinal bases. What one might call the
extreme wing of the Second Reformation began to redefine
itself in terms that could not be challenged by the new
forces of the Third Reformation. The central sacrament
was gone. Transubstantiation was rejected by the
rational mind, and the idea of ingesting bits of flesh
and blood, however homeopathic the dosage, was
repellant. Transubstantiation gave way to
consubstantiation, that is, ‘It is it isn’t!’ Finally
came nonsubstantiation, or, ‘Of course it isn’t!’ It had
ended up a grisly commemoration service, but what was
the point if the Divine Pardon did not follow?
This final body of christian
believers, devoid of the very initial transaction set up
in the Pauline initiative, required another emotional
outlet to be a binding factor. This movement, in reality
a side-effect of World War II, looked to the historical
persecution of the jews by the christian Church as its
great error. In the ethos of that shock they saw that
Lutheran Germany under the shadow of an admittedly
Crooked Cross had acquiesced in a genocide of millions
of jews. So it was that combined with this christian
guilt came the influence of an awakened world jewry
which called for the biblical restoration of its people
in the biblical lands, and in its sacred capital and its
Temple, the culinary necessity of the rabbi class. The
end result of this disastrous mix of elements, none of
which was essentially required by either judaism or
christianity, was that christianity became the home of a
fervent eschatology whose task it was to hurry on the
Final Day by the completion of the signs which indicated
the Second Coming. They wanted to jump from the
eschatological frying pan into the apocalyptic fire! The
result of this was that the same Church which for
centuries had burned, tortured and expelled jews, became
the fervent supporter of the state of Israel in an
emotional frenzy which educated jews found distinctly
repellant, but realistically admitted that it certainly
made a change. It was useful.
In the shortest time, less than half
a century, the right of sacrament was replaced with
baptism, a ritual that happily belonged in both judaism
and christianity. Forgiveness of sins no longer required
either bishop or presbyter, but only a dizzy and swaying
mass of enthusiastic believers celebrating the act of
being Born Again.
The end result of this is a poor and
uneducated mass of evangelical christians in the centre
of the USA who believe that there was no evolutionary
process, nor indeed that new species emerged over vast
stretches of time, but rather that they popped up in a
few days, and who believe that the Manifest Destiny of
the Founding Fathers, which was the task of American
citizens, was to restore the jewish people in a homeland
from which they would take on the rulership of the
world. In the enthusiastic move to fulfil these bizarre
prophesies, we have seen the USA governed by a Born
Again Christian and surrounded by key advisors all
firmly committed to the Israeli project.
It must be confronted that part of
this fevered embodying of the Book of Revelations in the
New Testament is the designation of Islam as a Satanic
force. Jerry Falwell has openly attacked Islam and
insulted it in the most savage manner. His rhetoric is
full of comic fantasy interpretations of our Deen with
lots of silly but no less menacing talk of the symbolism
of the moon and star, to which he gives his esoteric
interpretation.
Allah says in Surat at-Tawba, glory
be to Him: (9-32)

They desire to
extinguish Allah’s Light with their mouths.
But Allah refuses to do other than perfect His
Light,
even though the kafirun detest it.
It is significant that in the ayat
which follows this, Allah’s denunciation of the rabbis
and monks, that is, of the jewish and christian leaders,
states that the errors for which they will be punished
involve the misuse and abuse of material wealth. It is
very clear that the leaders of the evangelical movements
on the American continent, which necessitate mass
temples and mass hysterical celebrations, require a
capital base of enormous wealth, which is then further
generated by media propaganda. At the same time,
reference to the hoarding of wealth is in itself a
direct definition of the character of a usury economy. A
bank in itself is an institution of hoarding, and the
doctrine of investment is itself a practice of the
retention of wealth and not its spending.
Allah, glory be to Him, says clearly
in Surat at-Tawba (9:34-35):

You who have iman!
many of the rabbis and monks
devour people’s property under false pretences
and bar people from access to the Way of Allah.
As for those who hoard up gold and silver
and do not spend it in the Way of Allah,
give them the news of a painful punishment
on the Day it is heated up in the fire of Hell
and their foreheads, sides and backs are branded
with it:
‘This is what you hoarded for yourselves,
so taste what you were hoarding!’
There is no doubt that the USA is a
divided country. It is politically divided because it
has adopted adversarial party politics, called
democracy. It is of its nature that each major part
denounces the opposite part as unworthy, incapable or
corrupt. Since they both say that, and they govern
cyclically, it must follow that the people of a
democracy are governed by the worst in their society. It
is religiously divided. The dominant and energised force
is the post-christian rump of evangelicals. The passive
and media-dazzled humanists regard these evangelicals
with bemused helplessness. From a ruhani point of view,
that is from a spiritual and sufic point of view,
neither of these two parties, therefore, recognise that
their swift-acting enemy is usury, and thus the whole
financial system.
Allah the Exalted says again in Surat
at Tawba (9-33):

It
is He who sent His Messenger
with guidance and the Deen of Truth
to exalt it over every other deen,
even though the mushrikun detest it.
It is important for us in this
Ramadan time of true illumination to recognise the
import of one minor event that happened in our blessed
month of fasting. Osama bin Laden addressed a message to
the American people. He told them that their safety did
not lie with either presidential contender. He told them
that their safety lay with themselves. Safety does not
lie with ourselves, it lies uniquely with Allah. In
fact, one of His Divine Names is Al‑Hafidh. He is our
Protector, our only Protector. As far as we know, this
man did not mention the name of Allah. He did not call
the people of America to enter the Deen of Islam. He did
not ask Allah to protect the great Muslim community of
the United States. Nor did he tell the American people
that Allah had sent a Messenger for all mankind. He did
not recite the Book of Allah to give to the American
nation the Good News and the Warning.
Our Ramadan message to the people of
America is that in the Noble Qur’an, Allah, the Creator
of the universe, tells how Jesus spoke while still a
child in the cradle. Allah the Exalted relates in Surat
Maryam (19:30-36), when they asked, ‘How can a baby in a
cradle speak?’—

He said, ‘I am
the slave of Allah,
He has given me the Book and made me a Prophet.
He has made me blessed wherever I am
and directed me to do salat and give zakat as
long as I live,
and to show devotion to my mother.
He has not made me insolent or arrogant.
Peace be upon me the day I was born,
and the day I die
and the day I am raised up again alive.’
That is ‘Isa, son of Maryam,
the word of truth
about which they are in doubt.
It is not fitting for Allah to have a son.
Glory be to Him!
When He decides on something,
He just says to it, ‘Be!’ and it is.
‘Allah is my Lord and your Lord
so worship Him.
This is a straight path.’