The word ihram not found in Qur’an

It is important to note that the word ihram is not a derivative from the word Haram and this it is not found anywhere in the Reading.

If we pretend for a moment that Hurumun means what the religionists would have us believe it means pilgrimage or pilgrim’s clothes, we end up with the following ludicrous situation if we apply this rule across the board. Arba’atun Hurumun in 9:36 will thus read:

  • The count of months at the sight of God are twelve, four of them are pilgrimages.


  • The count of months at the sight of God are twelve, four of them are in pilgrim’s clothes.

Either rendition is patently untenable.

The full text of 9:36 says:

Inna ‘inda-tul shuh-ri ‘indal-lah hisna ‘a-sharor shah-ran fi-kitabil-lah yauma qorlaqas samawa-til ardht min-ha arba’atun Hurumun. Zalikal deen nul-qoyim. Fala tudht-limu fi-hin-na anfusakum wa-qorlitu musyrikin-na kaf-fatan kama yu-qotilunakum kaf-fatan. Wa’-lamu an-nal-lah ma’al mut-taqin.

The count of months according to God are twelve, as decreed in God’s Scripture since the day He created the Heavens and the Earth, four of them are restricted. This is the perfect deen. Therefore you must not wrong yourself in them, and you may fight the idol-worshippers (mushrikeen) each time they fight you. And you should know God is with the righteous.

By virtue of 9:36 where the word Hurumun appears it is said that it means pilgrimage or in the pilgrim’s garb and that the pilgrimage has to be performed for four months and in pilgrim garb. This is where we see the absurdity.

The ludicrous move by the religionists to corrupt 5:2 will astound many readers:

Ya-aiyuhal-lazi ana-amanu la-tuhilu sha-a’iril-lah

O you who believe do not violate God’s decrees


and the Restricted months

wal – hadya

and the guidelines


and the indicators (of restrictions)

wala-aman-nal baitil-Harama

and the harmony sanctioned in the system

yab-taghru fad-lan min rob-bihim warid-wa-nan

in seeking the grace and pleasure of your Lord

Wa-iza-Halal-tum fas-dho-dhu

And when they are permitted for you, then you may hunt

wala-yaj-riman-nakum shai-an qau-m

Do not be provoked by the enmity of any race

an-yasud-dukum anil-mas-jidil-Harami

who prevent you in upholding the sanctions of the consented decree.

an-taq-tadu wa-ta’awanu alal-bir-ri wal-taq-wa wala-ta ‘awanu alal-ismi wal-udwan-ni wat-taqul-lah ha-in-nal-lah sadi-dul-‘iqob

that you may transgress. And co-operate with each other in righteous deeds and piety, and do not co-operate with those committing sin and aggression.

The message in 5:2 is a continuation of the subject in the previous verse. It is about livestock and the hunting of wildlife. The word hunting (fas-tho-dhu) in this verse is a repeat from 5:1 where two verses complement each other on the same subject.

People’s comprehension of many words in 5:2 was distorted (as usual, through the priestly application of the concocted Hadith) to indicate a ritual observation of the so-called Haj pilgrimage in Mecca.

The manipulators of the Arab religion gave a new meaning to the word hadya and the Reading exposes their scheme. The word means guidance. They changed this word to mean an offering, or the sacrificial offering of an animal. The Reading says that assigning food offerings to God is evil:

They even assigned God a share of the crops and the livestock He has provided for them, by saying, “This is for God.” According to their claim they also say, “This is for our idols.” However, what was assigned to their idols will never reach God, while that assigned to God invariably ended up with their idols. Evil indeed is their Judgement. (6:136)

Please pay particular attention to this verse. God did not ask them to make the offering or to assign anything to Him. It was they who assigned portions of food and livestock to God and to their idols. God says their Judgement is evil, a very strong word in the Reading.

It is worth repeating this thought as it concerns the pilgrims who visit their stone idol in Mecca and sacrifice a goat, camel, or other livestock to God during the Haj pilgrimage – the Book of God says:

The animal sacrifice will never reach Him and they ultimately end up with their (stone) idol. (6:136)

Animal sacrifice to deities was an Arab practice long before the time of the Last Prophet. The religionists have falsely attributed the origin of animal sacrifice to the prophet Abraham, but their justification thereof is another story.

What is in the ‘Bayta’?

People do not realise that simple words like fi-hi (which means inside it) bi (which means with), ilaa (which means to or towards), minal which means (from the), and li (which means for) and a few others have had their meanings twisted or ignored in certain contexts by the gatekeepers of the Arab religion. These words are often appended to a verb as a prefix, but they make a lot of difference. For example, people fail to think carefully of the significance of fi-hi (inside it) in the following context:

Inside it (fi-hi) there are clear signs (ayatun bai-inatun) about the status of Abraham, (maqami ibrohim) and whoever enters it is secured. And it is the incumbent duty of mankind to take the challenge (Hajuu) to the system (bayti) for those who can find their way. And whoever disbelieves, surely God is self-sufficient, above any need of the worlds. (3:97)

The words fi-hi mean in the context, ‘in the bayta there are Clear Signs (ayatun-bai-natun) about the status of Abraham (maqamu ibrohim) and whoever enters it will find security’.

If the word bayta truly meant a house then, logically, we have: ‘In the house there are clear signs about the status of Abraham’. Can the religionists or the u’lema prove to the world that there are clear signs about the status of Abraham inside the cube structure standing in the middle of their mosque? No, they cannot. But what they will show us instead is a piece of copper in a gilded cage standing outside the house where their imagination apparently left a footprint.

The baytien in 3:96-97 refers to a system, not a house and we can find in this system (baytien) the clear signs (ayataun bai-inatun) of Abraham’s status (maqamu ibrohim) who was totally committed to the deen. Whoever embraces this system is secure. All humans are expected to take the challenge (Hajuu) to the system. They must try and to make their way to it.

For the sake of argument, if the word bayta actually meant a physical house and the Haj meant pilgrimage we would be confronted with a very serious problem. Each and every one of the 2,000,000 people who perform the ‘pilgrimage’ today must squeeze into the house to observe and sanctify the spot where Abraham stood for his ritual prayer. If this is the case, then the house the religionists have put up needs major reconstruction. It will also mean that if the number of Muslims increases, they will have to renovate God’s house in order to accommodate the new faithful. As it stands, God’s present ‘house’ can comfortably hold a couple of hundred at most.

That’s right. All the Sunnis and Shiites from every corner of the globe would have to squeeze into the ‘Ka’aba’ to achieve security. This is both illogical and impossible, but this is exactly what happens when we take the magnanimity of God’s ideals and equate them with the pettiness of people’s physical world. The result: an idol smack in the centre of a house of worship.

The religionists say those who worship God through images or icons are the pagans and idol-worshippers. Though quick to condemn and criticise others, the Arab religionists have never considered that they themselves do exactly the same. They also say the followers of other religions are pagans and idol-worshippers when they walk around their stone idols in their temples or around their temples. They do not pause to realise they are doing the same. The Reading tells us that it is not that their eyes that are blind, but their hearts.

Hindus, for example, walk seven times in an anti-clockwise circle around a lingam – or stone idol – at the centre of their temple. Hindus have been doing this for much longer than the religionists.

The fallacy of the religionists’ claim that the word bayta means a house is totally contrary to the concept of serving the Lord of the Universe. Each time a word in the Reading is twisted, it renders the message absurd. In a further case, they insist bayta means a house and we have what the religionists themselves call the Forbidden House when they refer to baytil-Harama.1 The question is why they make it a mandatory for everyone to go to a forbidden house.

To conceal the conspiracy they continue to distort the meaning of the word Haram to become sacred. The non-Arab Muslims around the world had never confronted the religionists with a simple question: how did a rock structure renovated as recently as 2003 become sacred? Which part of the building is actually sacred? They will soon discover it is not the square structure proper that is sacred, but the small black stone (or Hajar aswad) worshiped by their forefathers, that is sacred. The word Hajar aswad used in reference to the black stone is nowhere to be found in the Reading. But the religionists say it is part of Islam.

The Arabs have successfully reinstated their true stone deity of black basaltic rock as the focus of worship in Mecca to carry the torch of their forefathers’ religion, a pagan community.

1 i.e. what ‘Muslims’ call the mosque at Mecca.

Haram is not ‘sacred’

According to the usage in the Reading the word, Haram means denied, deprive, restrict, forbid or prohibit.

For example, there are three verses where the word bayta is suffixed with the word Haram to denote the specific restriction to the bayta.

When the same word is attached to the word masajid (consented decree) it signifies the specific restrictions of the decree. For clarity, it is called the sanction: a course or way imposed by God intended to make the people obey specific restrictions. However, in normal usage it can be said to mean ‘the sanctions of the system’ or the ‘specified restrictions of the consented decrees’ when referring to the restrictions in the bayta/system and masjid/consented decree.

For example, in 5:2 it says, aminal baytal-Harami1. It means the peaceful harmony of the sanctions in the system.

Another way of saying it is the peaceful harmony of the specified restrictions in the system2. The sanctions in this verse refer to the limits imposed by God in respect of His decrees so as to maintain the perfect harmony in His system.

This word appears only once, in 5:2. This verse talks about the violations of God’s decrees. In the same verse it also mentions shahrul-Harama indicating the restricted months, hadya/guidance, qola-ida/the indicator marking the restriction on hunting, which encompasses the harmony of the sanctions or the restrictions in God’s system.

On a similar note, upon receiving the revelations, the Prophet was instructed to focus himself towards the consented sanctions or the masajidal-Harami3. It includes the details of the sanctions prescribed in the Scripture.

You shall focus yourself to the consented sanctions (masajidal-Harami). Wherever you may be you shall focus yourself towards it. Even those who received the previous Scripture recognise that this is the truth from their Lord. (2:144)

The word Haram – when used as the ground form independently – means denied or deprived. The word Hurumun is derived from the same root and signifies the indefinite noun meaning restricted. Other words generated from the same root for example, Hurimat or yu-Harimu when used as the ground form can either be a perfect or imperfect active and mean forbidden.

The Palestinian Arabs exposed the hypocrisy of the religionists when they gave a new name to Jerusalem calling the city baytul-muqadis by their reckoning. If – as the religionists contend – baytal-Harami also meant ‘sacred house’ then the Palestinians would have never used the word baitul-muqadis for Jerusalem, as it is incorrect in both form and function.

Changing the word Haram to become sacred is an attempt to alter the message of the Reading because the word quddus is used in the Reading to mean sacred. In the Reading this word is used to refer to the sacred land (ard muqoddasa-talati) assigned to the Children of Israel. In 5:21 it says they refused to enter the sacred land. In 20:12 and 79:16 the same word is used to refer to the sacred valley of Tuwa (mu-qod-dasi-tuwa), the location of the burning bush. Lastly, the sacred self or rohil qudus (which loosely translated means holy spirit) is used to describe the existence of the sacred spirit in Jesus the son of Mary. Other than these, nothing is sacred but God.

This word is attributed to God at two different places in the Reading.

Huwal-lah hul-lazi laaila ha-il-laaha il-laa huwa al-malikil quddus sus-salam-mul mukminu muhai-minul a’zizu jab-barul mutakab-bir, subhanal-lah hi a’m-ma yus-rikun. (59:23)

He is the God, there is no god but Him, the Supreme Power, the Sacred, the Peace, the Faithful, the Supreme, the Almighty, the Compassionate, the Dignified, God be glorified above what they have associated with Him. (59:23)

Yu-sabihu lil-lah ma-fis-samawa ti-wa-ma fil- ard, al-malikul-qudusi, ‘zizil-hakim. (62:1)

Glorify God everything in the heaven and the earth, the King, the Sacred, the Almighty and the Judge. (62:1)

Here we see clearly that quddus is sacred and not Haram.

Baytal-Harami simply means the sanctioned system and a’inda-bayti-ka-mu-Harami means by ‘Your sanctioned system’. The religionists, however, are willing to say baytal-Harami is sacred house and that a’inda-Bayti-ka-muHarami means near Your Sacred house.

The Reading tells us Abraham was led to this bayta or system. Those who wish to follow his way should commit themselves to the same system. Abraham used the word a’inda-baytika-mu-Harami in 14:37 to indicate he wanted his progeny to live ‘by’ the sanctions in God’s system, the same system to which he is committed. It is illogical to say that Abraham told God he wished that his progeny and all the people around the world who follow his footsteps would become God’s neighbour.

  • The word bayti-ya: in 2:125 God directs Abraham and Ishmael to cleanse ‘My system’ referring to God’s system, and in 22:26 it says Abraham was given a place in My system or bayti-ya. It is ridiculous to say Abraham and Ishmael cleansed a physical house belonging to God and then were given a place to share the house with God.
  • In 5:2 the word aminal-bayti-Harama is mentioned to indicate God’s sanctions in the system about wildlife conservation. The sanction was prescribed for the harmonious preservation of His system.
  • In 14:37 Abraham said: I am placing my progeny by Your sanctioned system (or a’inda-baytika-muHarami) meaning to say his progeny should uphold their commitments according to the sanctions prescribed in God’s system.
  • In 3:97 it says: those people who are convinced may take the challenge to God’s system or Haj-jul baytin manis thadhor a’ ilaihi sabila if they can find their way to it. The verse also gives some indications that in the system there are profound signs regarding the status of Abraham.

Therefore, in the Reading bayta refers to system and not house. If we explore a little further the subject of the family of Abraham in the Reading we see the relevance of his position in God’s system – and not in God’s ‘house’.

1 The Muslims were deceived by the religionists that this word means sacred.

2 Do not upset nature. Wildlife conservation is one deed He sanctioned in the system or Baytal-harama. He created everything in the heavens and the earth in perfect balance. Thus hunting of wildlife should be allowed only during specific period.

3 The Arabs deceived everyone that this word refers to their mosque in Mecca.