The last phrase in 2:125 is wa-roka’is-sujud, which means those who humble themselves consenting. The religionists have mangled the meaning here and say it means to physically bow and prostrate. It embroils a regimented body movement only worthy of pagan rituals.
Physical bowing and prostrating have become the critical components of the body movements in the Arab religion. Without these pantomimed movements their rituals will become redundant and useless. They believe the instruction of these body movements were ordained by God by virtue of 2:125 and 22:26.
For many centuries, non-Arabs who have mastered the Arabic language have allowed themselves to be subjugated by the religionists without verifying simple words by reference to other verses in the Reading. Having discovered this, I feel sorry for the Muslims who perform these silly body movements without verifying the correctness of their understanding from their own Book.
Since they are conditioned to believe that the word bayta in 2:125 means the house, naturally, bayti-ya in the same verse must mean My house. Although they do not physically cleanse God’s house, they derive tremendous satisfaction by circumambulating the Cube. The Muslims were made to believe that the meaning of the passage in 2:125 is:
Thor-hira Cleanse the [physical] house.
Thor-iffin Walk around the house (because they believe the religionists who say that the word Tho-iffin has the same meaning as the word Thawwaf. However, these two words are not the same).
a’kiffin Retreat to a [physical] house.
wa-roka’ is sujud Bow and prostrate physically to a [physical] house (since they also believe the word roka’ is sujud is physical bowing and prostrating).
Since they proudly claim Islam abhors all images and icons, how can they not notice that the religious rites they faithfully observe are blatant idol-worship? Do they not devote their faith and bow and prostrate to a physical house?
If their answer is no:
- Then why do they say it is ‘God’s house’?
- Why do they use the expression baytul-lah which is not found in the Reading?
The truth is the innovators of the Arab religion have been very successful in deceiving people. They make their followers perform ridiculous body movements without telling them why. Yet they cannot even answer these simple questions!
No modern Arab or scholar of the Arab religion can provide intelligent answers to these basic questions:
- Is the stone house in Mecca God’s house or baytul-lah?
- Why is God not inside His house – or is He?
- Why do they have to bow and prostrate to the rocks carved by the Arab?
- Are they prostrating to God or to the rocks?
- Why do they walk around the house and in an anti-clockwise direction?
- If they are prostrating to God and not the rock hunk, can we move the stone structure to Japan, Australia, Canada, Mexico or other countries?
- Would their pilgrimage ritual and their five daily ritual prayers be nullified without making the rock hunk as their focal point.
Of course, the crux of the matter lies in simple logic. If they worship the house, they need to say that God is present in it. If that is the case – fine. However, if God does not live in the Cube, they are venerating the cube-idol. All they have to do is prove that God is in there.
If no sensible answer is forthcoming from the religionists themselves, why then should the Muslims continue to put their trust in the religionists? Perhaps they naively assume it is not harmful to follow the religionists blindly. The pertinent question is whether obeying such absurdity will save them from the Hell Fire? Is it worthwhile ignoring something so important by not verifying the correctness of its meaning by using one’s own common sense? According to the Reading ‘the worst creatures at the sight of God are those who do not use their common sense’.
Is it not time yet for the sensible Muslims to come to their senses and seek forgiveness and mercy from their Lord while they still can? Is it so difficult for them to be sincere to Him alone in pursuing for His grace and pleasure? These are some of the fundamental questions the non-Arabs should consider seriously.
The religionists have, indeed, twisted the meaning of many words in the Reading to divert mankind from the path of God including wa-roka’is-sujud in 2:125 which simply means those who humble themselves consentingly.
The message in 2:125 is that Abraham was directed to the system and had diligently committed himself to devote and humble himself with consent to the will of God in the system. His son Ishmael was similarly committed, and both of them cleansed the system for throngs of people who are devoted and also those who humble1 themselves consentingly to the same system. Abraham and Ishmael were not devoting themselves to a physical house, neither have they circumambulated, or bow and prostrate physically to some rocks. Those who follow the footsteps of Abraham are not expected to bow or prostrate to anything. They should devote and humble themselves by consenting themselves to the same system by upholding their commitments to observe the deen prescribed by God. That is all that is meant.
There is no verse in the Reading that implies that roka’is-sujud carries the sense of physical bowing and prostrating.
1 Humble, humbling or humbled is derived from the word ruku’. Humble people feel they are not important or good enough to criticise others or to have much attention paid to them by other people. God told the children of Israel to be humble to accept His revelations. In 2:43 He said, ‘war-ka’u-ma’al-ror-ke-en’