Robert Spencer Grasps at Any Crack Pot “mythistory”: Links Hajj Origins to Hinduism

Robert Spencer cites crackpot mythistorian on Hajj

Robert Spencer is failing to convince America that Islam itself is a threat to national security. Americans are waking up to the fact that the universal values that bring Americans and Muslims together are far more numerous than our differences. But Spencer has spent the last several years trying to “prove” that Muhammad, Prophet of Islam, was a war-monger, a fanatic, a woman-hater, a pervert, (insert evil cliché here), etc. For example, one of his top books is, “Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion.” All of his arguments are predicated on the fact that Muhammad existed in order to found Islam. Jihadist terror didn’t come from nowhere, right?

Well, these arguments just won’t cut it anymore. People can only be fooled for so long by a handful of cherry-picked verses and facts. Perhaps Islam does have something in common with Judaism and Christianity, Spencer’s readers might think. These are dangerous thoughts in Spencer’s profession. So he has moved on to a new strategy: Muhammad didn’t exist. Islam is, in fact, an extension of Hinduism. How did he reach such a conclusion and for what purpose?

Spencer receives an e-mail from the mysterious “Arnaud” allegedly an “Islamic scholar who writes from Switzerland” with a strange theory about how Hajj (pilgrimage) and Salat (ritual prayer) are actually Hindu in origin. He posts the article, the purpose of which is to “debunk” the two pillars of Islam:

Islam is like a special table that needs 5 legs (so-called “5 pillars”). Displace two of them and the table would fall, wouldn’t it?

At some point Spencer must have realized that it was simply the junk history of “mythistorian” and “crack pot” Purushottam Nagesh Oak. The article is riddled with so many factual errors that Spencer takes the post down. He must have thought that anything with a negative angle on Islam deserves the benefit of the doubt. Post first; ask questions later.

Yet Spencer depends upon his audience perceiving him as an authoritative “Islamic scholar.” He has to maintain some pro forma standards of objectivity. Damage control is needed. So he rewrites the article, taking out the most egregious misinformation (just enough to appear somewhat scholarly), crediting an unnamed “European researcher” (not Arnaud), and publishes it on Pam Geller’s site as a part of his new-found effort to prove that Muhammad never existed.

What does this little sidetrack into mythistory have to do with Jihad and “Islamic” terrorism, the focus of Spencer’s work? Nothing at all, which plainly demonstrates what we’ve been saying all along. Spencer is an intolerant fundamentalist, a religious polemicist, NOT an expert on security or terrorism. He cares about sustaining his career on the back of Islamophobic prejudice, even if that means drawing upon every crackpot theory he receives from fellow internet goons. No need for his allegations and theories to be logical or internally consistent, so long as the target is Islam. The ends justify the means.

Honestly, this is quite bizarre coming from Spencer, a man who has sold himself for so long as the “politically-incorrect” Islamic scholar willing to speak hard truths about the “intolerant” Muhammad, the prophetic figure allegedly at the heart of Jihadist terrorism. Now it seems he’s willing to completely change his tactics and develop other theories to attack Islam. Whatever Spencer ultimately believes about the nature of Islam, it must be profoundly negative and foreign. He sees no “universal moral values” in Islam that Muslims can share with other religions (see Politically Incorrect, Ch. 6).

Yesterday, Muhammad was a fire-breathing infidel-slayer. Today, he is a Hindu myth gone wrong. Tomorrow, I imagine he’ll be something else, perhaps the first Nazi. Wait, that’s been done. Oh well. If the old stuff doesn’t work anymore, you’ll think of something new, right Bob?

7 thoughts on “Robert Spencer Grasps at Any Crack Pot “mythistory”: Links Hajj Origins to Hinduism

  1. Spencer’s article on this subject is tentative and exploratory, and acknowledges that he is reporting something he has recently heard from someone else, which he finds interesting. Speculation of this kind is mounted on other historical subjects all the time – the origins of Christianity being a favourite.

    Spencer is apparently taking an interest in all such possibities regarding Islam, because he is working on a book which will report on and discuss some of the more surprising new theories about how Islam actually originated. Up to now he has taken the traditional view that Islam was initiated by a single prophet for granted, even though that view of the matter actually derives from Islamic folklore, and is being questioned by scholars (real ones, with PhDs) all the time.

    I certainly didn’t get the impression that the objective was defamation. I’m sure Mr Spencer would be the first to concede that the Hinduism connection is a dead letter, if that turns out to be the case.

  2. The fool and right wing Hindu nationalist P.N. Oak was completely rejected by all real academia and scholars even in India; so much so that Oak resorted to claiming a hilarious and outlandish conspiracy theory that the alleged “truth” of the “Vedic origins” of everything in the world were allegedly being suppressed by a wide array of forces from the British, to Christians and their leaders, to Muslims, and even including what he termed Marxists and Leftist Indian secularists (i.e. real academics in India that pointed out what a crackpot and fraud P.N. Oak was!) Needless to say all of Oak’s theories are garbage and lies and his one about the Holy Kaaba is an especially pathetic lie on Oak’s part. He makes up a FAKE quote he says was “found” on an alleged “inscription” in the Kaaba and that Oak alleges was detailed in a Ottoman Turkish book from 1742 CE. Aside from the fact that Oak simply makes up a false “inscription” that has never existed and that no other scholar in the world claims exists, Oak also gets the Ottoman Sultan of the period wrong in his own little claim that he made up. Again Oak claims the fake “inscription”, that we know he simply made up, Oak alleges this fake “inscription” is “documented” in an Ottoman Empire source commissioned by the Sultan in a book (that doesn’t exist i.e. Oak makes up a fake book “name” and Oak then claims this book is “secretly” kept at a library in Istanbul, Turkey!). Anyway Oak claims this supposed Ottoman “book” is from 1742 CE and Oak then goes on to say that it was commissioned and put together by the Ottoman Sultan Selim. Oak didn’t even bother to read a simple list of the dates of the reigns of the different Ottoman Sultans. There were 3 Ottoman Sultan’s named Selim (or Salim) they were: Sultan Selim I who reigned from 1512 CE to 1520 CE, Sultan Selim II who reigned from 1566 CE to 1574 CE, and Sultan Selim III who reigned from 1789 to 1807 CE. The Sultan of the Ottoman Empire in 1742 CE was Sultan Mahmud I who reigned from 1730 CE to 1754 CE!

    The funny thing in response to Robert Spencer is this same crackpot P.N. Oak also claimed all of Christianity was based on Hinduism and particularly on Catholics (from I think Robert Spencer claims to be) Oak claimed the Vatican itself was built by Vedic Hindus and that the position of Pope was originally allegedly a Vedic Priesthood!

  3. The fake, made up supposed “inscription” that P.N. Oak alleges was “found” in a dish inside the Holy Kaaba (according to Oak’s lunacy) allegedly had the name of a legendary Indian Emperor named king Vikramaditya (102 BCE- 15 CE) written on it (I wonder if the fraud Oak was claiming this was written in Sanksrit as well which would be more hilarious because Sanskrit is an Indo-European language of the subclass Indo-Aryan, whereas Arabic is obviously a Semitic language thus the two languages are not related at all).

    Again there is no evidence of any “inscription” that P.N. Oak alleges, Oak simply made it up himself out of whole cloth as they say. Much like how P.N. Oak also claims the religion of Christianity is again from Hinduism (Oak claimed everything in the world was allegedly of Vedic origin i.e. he was again far right wing Hinducentric extremist of the right wing, racist Hindutva armed movements in India). Oak specifically says Christianity start out as Chrisn-nity or Krishna-neeti and that the Vatican was again build by Hindus and originally called vatika meaning “hermitage” supposedly and that the station of the Catholic pope was allegedly a Vedic Preisthood until Constantine I allegedly killed the Vedic “Pope” according to the crackpot Oak.

    And then once again on his fake, ridiculous claims about the Holy Kaaba there was no alleged “inscription” Oak simply made it up himself, and Oak also made up a fake book he claims the Ottoman’s commissioned in 1742 CE documenting this supposed “inscription” (i.e. the one P.N. Oak himself made up so he’s just making up everything with no sources or anything!) and again it is truly hilarious that Oak couldn’t even get the name of the Ottoman Sultan for the year 1742 CE for his own little theory he claims this fake non-existent book by was commissioned or written by the Ottoman Sultan Selim when no Selim (there were 3 Selim’s that ended up being Ottoman Sultan’s again, Selim I, Selim II and Selim III) ruled the Ottomans in 1742 CE any easy search will show that the Ottoman Sultan in the year 1742 CE was again Sultan Mahmud I who again reigned from 1730 CE till his death in 1754 CE. And again in his insane conspiracy tone, Oak claims the “book” he’s making up is allegedly still kept “secretly” in some “mysterious” library in Istanbul, Turkey till this day!!! Oak was a true insane, refuted, crackpot.

  4. Also apparently Oak contradicted himself and claimed this non-existent book he entitled “Sayar ul-Okul” was allegedly edited at different times in different places of course with no sources for any of his lunacy. Some times he would say “edited Berlin 1864 CE” and other times he’d say “edited Beirut 1932 CE”. And the name of the supposed “library” he claims this book of the fake made up “inscription” he also makes up, doesn’t exist there is no library even by the name he gives in his crazy theories!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *