Thoughts to consider:
It is asserted by Islamic scholars and Western Academics that this is forgery, despite the acceptance and spreading of it among some groups of Muslims – and, Allah knows best each person’s intention.
As noted elsewhere: Hempher is not mentioned anywhere outside of this text as existing. No historical record can corroborate that Hempher existed and, as shown in the text of the book and the events reported within, it is highly questionable and likely a complete forgery. Western Academics have compared this text to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as it likewise has a large readership but clearly has roots in forgery and become widespread with the agendas of certain groups. Regarding the so-called memoirs of Hempher / Hemphery:
On the first page Hempher says that the British Empire is vast, however the expansion of the British Empire to the mentioned areas (China, India, Middle East) did not occur until a century after this book is supposed to have been written. Hempher says that he met AbdulWahhab in Basra (Iraq) in 1712. At this time AbdulWahhab was 9 years old (born in 1703), and it is known that he did not travel to seek knowledge in Basra until 1722. Further chronological and dating discrepancies exist throughout, which have been reported in other larger critiques. Likewise, such a figure with such an important position and supposed affect on history, ought to have some link to historical record – however, there is absolutely no trace of him existing anywhere. In addition, there are no historical copies of this book. It emerges after a couple hundred years in complete form with unknown origins.
A question to consider: If the scholars of Islam and the academics of the West can find no evidence that this book is true, and it has been written by a non-Muslim, why are we taking it as truth and attacking our own Muslim brothers with it? Shall we not verify a claim before we spread it? Likewise, if we are to take knowledge (in particular if it is knowledge that attacks Muslims and the unity of the Ummah), shall we not take it from trustable scholarly sources?
And, Allah knows best.
9 comments:
- Because that is what Muslims do best, follow the doubt, get stung twice, hundreds of times over by the same backstabbing hole and drop their brother like tomorrow was J.Day. =[
May we find the unity and peace this website is promoting, inshaAllah.
http://www.muslimness.com
What makes these accounts somewhat believable is Britain 's history in other countries. As well as the current stance of Wahhabism against the orthodox tenets of Islam. Not to mention the western relations with Saudi royal family, which despite Saudi being the breeding ground for so called terrorist, seems to remains strong.the biggest arms deal with the homeland of 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11. Osama bin laden having been in the CIA payroll for years. There is no way the US and Britain maintain their relationship in such a way unless they have their hooks in the Saudi elite through it's mason brotherhood of evil. I don't need to ever read hemphers memoirs to know what is going on here.
Thanks for your comment Anonymous - I suppose your last lines sums of the moral of the story: This is a post specifically about the so-called text Confessions of a British Sky, and regarding the validity of it or not.
I'd be happy to discuss some of these other ideas you've shared - I hope that you'll share them in a more relevant post in the near future.
All the best.
the only person debunked the Hempher paper is unknown person Abul Harith so as called Islamic scholar..not the entire Islamic world .Do you reseach
jazakAllah khier for stopping by and posting Anonymous. Do kindly note that I did not say, "the entire Islamic world" rather I said "Islamic scholars." The person you have mentioned is not the only one to speak on this text. However, that aside: if I have mentioned some factual error or mistake in my critique please do correct me. Does it strike you as odd that no historical copies of this text for over a century? That we don't know who the author is? Ought we not use the methodology of isnad and verification of narrators before accepting things as truth, as the greatest scholars have done?
I hope inshaAllah to hear from you soon. barakAllah fiikum.
I have read these so called CONFESSIONS OF HEMPHER. I believe this is another attempt to weaken the Muslims.
After reading his memoirs, there was a quite a few mentions of Jihad being made as an old thought and not obligatory and Adul Wahab apparently took on this idea and preached it. If this is the case then why are his teachings re Jihad not being folloed today when all others are by the Wahabis/Salaf? Why is it mainlt the Wahabis/Salaf fighting Jihad in other countries?
Also if Abdul Wahab is a scholar and learned man and also convinced many other people to his way of thinking, how on earth would NON-MUSLIM british spy be able to convince a learned scholar to his views?
On top of that a Scholar who would do short term marriage contracts because someone suggested it to him?
As far as Anonymousabove is concerened, i can surely say you are a BARELWI, who is happy to jump at the moment a Wahabi/Salaf is to be blackened by propoganda. It is also said about Ahad Rida Khan Barelwi that he was a British Agent and caused the break up of Muslims brotherhood in India, tomorrow if a confession was released about him you would be the 1st to deny and call anyone who suggests syuch a non-belioever.
Anonymous get your facts straight and wake to the reality of the non-muslim continued attack to weaken our Emaan.
The existing scenario of Islam in the whole world actually confirmed that confession by Humphrey are correct. Can someone come upfront and claim Muslims did not lost Spain and turkey was not turned into pieces. Last 200 years are the story of muslim defeat in every sphere of life by the British & US. We are in a state of denial and only Allah will help us to over come these problems
Blaming others and logical fallacies ... agreed there is some kind of denial going on.
Asselamu Alaikum,
Bernard Haykel also ruled it is a fabrication - here:
Anti-Wahhabism: a footnote
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/mesh/2008/03/anti_wahhabism_a_footnote/
Excerpt:
The Iraqi document echoes a well-known Turkish conspiracy theory—probably fabricated by one Ayyub Sabri Pasha—which claims that the British sought to weaken the Ottoman empire by creating the Wahhabi movement.
I ask: Why do the Brithish and the Americans attack "Wahabis"? Why woulod they wish to destroy their investment. The British may have Supported Qadyanism as it can be seen from Qadyani Anri-Jihad teaching. "Wahabis" are nightmare of the Brits. There is also as attempt to confuse the pro-West Al Saud family and the Religious community in the kingdom.
Post a Comment