Read & Listen

Statistics

Members: 1
News: 9286
Web Links: 26
Visitors: 113275944

Who's Online

We have 1 guest online

Syndicate

Is Hubal The Same As Allah? Print E-mail
Written by mquran.org   
Thursday, 23 November 2006

1. Introduction

Those have argued over many years that "Allah" of the Qur'an was in fact a pagan Arab "Moon god" of pre-Islamic times. The primary proponent of this view was Robert Morey, and, along with his missionary brethren, he has propagated these views extensively. We have made a devastating refutation of this claim by utilising the archaeological evidence and showed how Morey's claims were nothing but a grand fraud.

Interesting is the name HUBAL (in Arabic and Hebrew script the vowels were not noted). This shows a very suspicious connection to the Hebrew HABAAL (= the Baal). As we all know this was an idol mentioned in the Bible (Num. 25:3, Hosea 9:10, Deut. 4:3, Josh. 22:17 and Ps. 106:28-29). Where was Baal worshipped? In Moab! It was the "god of fertility". Amr ibn Luhaiy brought Hubal from Moab to Arabia.

Just like the "Moon god" allegation of Morey, those have also claimed that Hubal was a Moon god, and by identity Allah also was a Moon god. Are these claims of the Christian missionaries true? In this article we would like to examine the nature of Allah and Hubal from the historical, lexical and archaeological point of view. We will show the claim that Allah and Hubal are identical, is untenable not only from the point of view of history but also from archaeology. A lexical and epigraphic study will confirm that Hubal and "Ha-Baal" are different deities.

2. Hubal = Allah? A Detailed Investigation

The Quraysh had several idols in and around the Ka‘bah. The greatest of them was Hubal. Its cornelian or agate statue stood inside the Ka‘bah. The statue of Hubal was of a male figure with a golden arm - a replacement of a broken-off stone arm when Hubal came into possession of the Quraysh. ‘Amr ibn-Luhayy imported Hubal and it was first set up by Khuzaymah ibn Mudrikah ibn al-Ya's ibn Mudar. Consequently, it used to be called Khuzaymah's Hubal.[1] In front of Hubal there were seven divination arrows. A custodian guarded the statue, received the offerings and sacrifices and conducted future-forecasting to pilgrims. The cult associated with him involved divination and forecasting of future events such as marriage, death, apology, lineage, etc.[2] ‘Abd al-Muttalib, grandfather of the Prophet Muhammad, shuffled the divination arrows in order to find out which of his ten children he should sacrifice in fulfilment of a vow. The arrow pointed to his son ‘Abdullah, father of Muhammad. The Quraysh deterred the Prophet's grandfather, arguing that his act would establish an example that other Arabs might follow.

ORIGINS OF HUBAL AT MAKKAH

It was mentioned that ‘Amr ibn-Luhayy imported Hubal to Makkah. What were the origins of Hubal?

According to Nehls, in an attempt to connect Hubal with "Ha-Baal" (i.e., the Baal), the Hubal idol at Makkah originated from Moab. He says:

Where was Baal worshipped? In Moab! It was the "god of fertility". Amr ibn Luhaiy brought Hubal from Moab to Arabia.

Not surprisingly, he did not mention any supporting evidence to prove that the Islamic traditions say that ‘Amr ibn Luhayy brought the Hubal idol from Moab to Arabia. Those lifting each others work without proper verification is not entirely surprising. Yet another one lifted Nehls' claim about the origins of the Hubal idol at Makkah from Moab, only to present a quote from Hitti's History Of The Arabs that says ‘Amr ibn-Luhayy imported the Hubal idol "from Moab or Mesopotamia";[3] thus clearly throwing uncertainty over the Moabite origins of Hubal. From the Islamic traditions, it is unclear where the Hubal idol in Makkah originated from. Al-Azraqi says ‘Amr ibn Luhayy brought Hubal from Hit in Mesopotamia, a town situated on the Euphratus,[4] while Ibn al-Kalbi implied that it came from al-Balqa' in Bilād al-Shām.[5] Ibn Hisham[6] and Ibn Kathir,[7] on the other hand, say that it came from Moab in the land of Balqa' in Transjordan. There is no clear-cut position that can be adduced from the Islamic traditions on the issue of the place of origin of the Hubal idol at Makkah, although all of them are united on its foreign origin.[8] There was an awareness among the pre-Islamic Arabs that Hubal was an imported deity and this partly explains why he was not integrated into the "divine family" of Allah unlike the three "daughters of Allah", Allat, Manat and al-‘Uzza. This brings us directly to the issue of whether or not Hubal was nothing but Allah.

THE IDENTITY OF ALLAH AND HUBAL ACCORDING TO ISLAMIC TRADITION

Perhaps the earliest scholar to suggest that Hubal was originally the proper name of Allah in Makkah was the German orientalist Julius Wellhausen. His hypothesis was based on circumstantial evidence and argumentum e silentio. Wellhausen noted that Allah was always a proper name in the Arabic sources and not a common noun. According to him, Allah was the title used within each tribe to address its tribal deity instead of its proper name[9] and that Allah became the Islamic substitute for the name of any idol.[10] Wellhausen suggested that apart from Hubal's known presence in the Ka‘bah, there is no polemic in the Qur'an against him.[11] In other words, while the Qur'an railed against Allat, Manat, and al-‘Uzza, whom the pagan Arabs referred to as the "daughters of Allah", it stopped short of attacking the cult of Hubal. Although such an argument can be applied to any of the pagan idols not mentioned in the Qur'an, such as Dhul-Khalasa and Dhul-Shara, the argumentum e silentio of Wellhausen became a rallying cry for those and apologists to claim that Hubal was none other than Allah.[12] This is clearly a logical fallacy. Fahd had critiqued Wellhausen's position by pointing out that the lack of Qur'anic reference is due to the fact that there was nothing to distinguish Hubal from the other Arab divinities such as Dhul-Khalasa and Dhul-Shara whereas other divinities mentioned in the Qur'an, i.e., Allat, Manat and al-‘Uzza, were distinguished by being regarded as the "daughters of Allah".[13] Similarly, the Qur'an also criticizes the position of the "sons of Allah" attributed to Jesus and Uzayr.

Moreover, the hypothesis that Hubal was originally the proper name of Allah suffers from serious difficulties. In the battle of Uhud, the distinction between the followers of Allah and the followers of Hubal is made clear by the statements of Prophet Muhammad and Abu Sufyan. Ibn Hisham narrates in the biography of the Prophet:

When Abu Sufyan wanted to leave he went to the top of the mountain and shouted loudly saying, 'You have done a fine work; victory in war goes by turns. Today in exchange for the day (of Badr). Show your superiority, Hubal,' i.e. vindicate your religion. The apostle told ‘Umar to get up and answer him and say, God [Allah] is most high and most glorious. We are not equal. Our dead are in paradise; your dead are in hell.[14]

The same incident is narrated in Sahih of al-Bukhari with a slightly different wording (also see here).

Abu Sufyan ascended a high place and said, "Is Muhammad present amongst the people?" The Prophet said, "Do not answer him." Abu Sufyan said, "Is the son of Abu Quhafa present among the people?" The Prophet said, "Do not answer him." Abu Sufyan said, "Is the son of Al-Khattab amongst the people?" He then added, "All these people have been killed, for, were they alive, they would have replied." On that, 'Umar could not help saying, "You are a liar, O enemy of Allah! Allah has kept what will make you unhappy." Abu Sufyan said, "Superior may be Hubal!" On that the Prophet said (to his companions), "Reply to him." They asked, "What may we say?" He said, "Say: Allah is More Elevated and More Majestic!" Abu Sufyan said, "We have (the idol) al-‘Uzza, whereas you have no ‘Uzza!" The Prophet said (to his companions), "Reply to him." They said, "What may we say?" The Prophet said, "Say: Allah is our Helper and you have no helper."

One can see clear facts emerging. Firstly, the Quraysh worshipped Hubal and al-‘Uzza (among other deities not stated here); the Muslims, on the other hand, worshipped Allah. Secondly, to the statement of Abu Sufyan ascribing superiority to Hubal, Prophet Muhammad replied that Allah was more Majestic and more Glorious. Thirdly, the dead of the pagan Quraysh in the Battle of Uhud who worshipped Hubal, al-‘Uzza among other gods are in the hell, whereas the dead who worshipped Allah are in heaven. Fourthly, the worshippers of Allah are not equal to the worshippers of Hubal. Since the Christian missionaries have a habit of using a syllogism even though there are clear statements refuting their position, let us note the following syllogism.

  1. Hubal was worshipped by the Quraysh; Allah was worshipped by the Muslims.
  2. The worshippers of Hubal are in hell; the worshippers of Allah are in heaven.
  3. Therefore, Hubal was not Allah.

Commenting on the above tradition, the Christian missionaries say:

Unlike the verse in the Quran, this one does mention Hubal by name and suggests that he was distinct from Allah. Again, Muhammad transforming Allah from a pagan deity into the sole universal God, a transformation which was different from any similarly named deity, can account for why Sufyan viewed Hubal as a different god altogether.

Furthermore, this tradition actually poses problems for the Muslims since it implies that the pagans such as Abu Sufyan did not view Allah as the supreme god, but one of many rival gods. Sufyan attributes his victory over Muhammad and his god to Hubal and Uzza, suggesting that at least in his mind these gods were equal, if not superior, to Allah. Sufyan obviously felt that Allah could be challenged and defeated, which means that these pagans didn't see Allah as the unrivaled and supreme Deity as both the Quran and Islamic traditions claim.

It is hard to see how this tradition poses "problems" for Muslims. In fact, this tradition clearly refutes those' claim that Allah and Hubal were identical. Furthermore, Abu Sufyan, the chieftain of the Quraysh, became a Muslim in 8 AH just a few days before the liberation of Makkah, after a personal council with the Prophet.[15] He swallowed his pride and admitted that:

By God, I thought that had there been any God with God, he would have continued to help me.[16]

In other words, Hubal and al-‘Uzza which Abu Sufyan had proclaimed as gods neither assisted nor helped him to defeat the Muslims. He then accepted Allah as the one, supreme God beside whom there exists no other god. Furthermore, he was also personally involved in the smashing of the idol of Allat, one of the so called daughters of Allah.[17] It must also be added that if the idol of Hubal which occupied the Ka‘bah in Makkah represented the image of Allah, then why did Muhammad order it to be destroyed? He could easily have left the statue as it was and justified it as the image of Allah, thus making it far easier for those transitioning from polytheism to monotheism. History records this never happened, rather Muhammad ordered all the idols destroyed. It is not difficult to see why this is the case if one pays attention to the Islamic sources, especially those which inform us directly about the life and times of Muhammad. Consider the following. The most supreme delight in the afterlife is the ability to see Allah. Anticipating this humbling and blissful moment is a source of immense joy and happiness for all the believers.[18] We find narrated in the Sahih of al-Bukhari the following report:

On the authority of Abu Huraira: The people said, "O Allah's Apostle! Shall we see our Lord on the Day of Resurrection?" The Prophet said, "Do you have any difficulty in seeing the moon on a full moon night?" They said, "No, O Allah's Apostle." He said, "Do you have any difficulty in seeing the sun when there are no clouds?" They said, "No, O Allah's Apostle." He said, "So you will see Him, like that. Allah will gather all the people on the Day of Resurrection, and say, 'Whoever worshipped something (in the world) should follow (that thing),' so, whoever worshipped the sun will follow the sun, and whoever worshiped the moon will follow the moon, and whoever used to worship certain (other false) deities, he will follow those deities...

The importance of Prophet Muhammad's exposition cannot be underestimated. He is describing the single most pleasurable moment of the people of Paradise. Equally though we are reminded of the fate of those who worshipped other than God alone. It is amply clear the idol Hubal and those who worshipped him along with other false deities and their followers, are clearly distinguished from Allah and the worshippers of Allah – on this juncture Islamic tradition is very clear.[19]

In fact, a number of scholars have already noted that Hubal and Allah can't be one and the same entity. For example, Patricia Crone made an argument concerning Wellhausen's suggestion that Allah might simply be another name for Hubal. Commenting on the Islamic tradition she says:

One would have to fall back on the view that Allah might simply be another name for Hubal, as Wellhausen suggested; just as the Israelites knew Yahwe as Elohim, so the Arabs knew Hubal as Allah, meaning "God". It would follow that the guardians of Hubal and Allah were identical; and since Quraysh were not guardians of Hubal, they would not be guardians of Allah, either... When ‘Abd al-Mutallib is described as having prayed to Allah while consulting Hubal's arrow, it is simply that the sources baulk at depicting the Prophet's grandfather as a genuine pagan, not that Allah and Hubal were alternative names of the same god. If Hubal and Allah had been one and the same deity, Hubal ought to have survived as an epithet of Allah, which he did not. And moreover there would not have been traditions in which people are asked to renounce the one for the other.[20]

Similarly, while discussing Hubal and Allah in the context of the Battle of Uhud, Hayward R. Alker points out that they both can't be one and the same.

This seems, however, unlikely, especially as, at the battle of Uhud, in the course of the warfare between Quraysh of Mecca and Muslims of Medina, the clash between the Meccans' god Hubal and the Muslims' Allah is stressed.[21]

F. E. Peters makes a clear distinction between Hubal and Allah on the basis that the former was a newcomer and the Quraysh adopted Hubal to further their political alliance with the surrounding tribe of Kinana.

Or, to put the question more directly, was Hubal rather than Allah, "Lord of the Ka‘ba"? Probably not, else the Qur'an, which makes no mention of Hubal, would certainly have mentioned the contention. Hubal was, by the Arabs' own tradition, a newcomer to both Mecca and Ka‘ba, an outsider introduced by the ambitious ‘Amr ibn Luhayy, and the tribal token around which the Quraysh later attempted to construct a federation with the surrounding Kinana, whose chief deity Hubal was. Hubal was introduced into the Ka‘ba but he never supplanted the god Allah, whose House it continued to be.[22]

Similar conclusions have been reached by von Grunebaum.

It seems quite a defensible suggestion that even before Muhammad the Ka‘ba was first and foremost the holy place of Allah and not that of the Hubal deriving from the Nabataeans and 359 other members of the astrological syncretic pantheon assembled there.[23]

What now becomes the clutching of straws for those is the tenuous claim that ‘Abd al-Muttalib's praying to Allah whilst standing next to the statue of Hubal[24] shows that "Allah to whom Muhammad's grandfather vowed and worshiped was none other than Hubal". As to how standing next to the statue of Hubal and praying to Allah is equivalent to Hubal actually being Allah is a great mystery. By this "logic", a Christian standing next to the cross and praying to the Trinitarian deity makes him a cross-worshipper. Moreover, the text in English and Arabic clearly distinguishes and differentiates between Hubal and Allah. The Qur'an acknowledges that the Makkans were aware of Allah as one true God;[25] yet they worshipped deities other than Him who will act as intercessors.

They serve, besides Allah, things that hurt them not nor profit them, and they say: "These are our intercessors with Allah." [Qur'an 10:18]

IS HUBAL = HA-BAAL? AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ENQUIRY

Nehls says:

Interesting is the name HUBAL (in Arabic and Hebrew script the vowels were not noted). This shows a very suspicious connection to the Hebrew HABAAL (= the Baal). As we all know this was an idol mentioned in the Bible (Num. 25:3, Hosea 9:10, Deut. 4:3, Josh. 22:17 and Ps. 106:28-29).

In fact, such an argument, albeit in a more sophisticated way was also made by Sergio Noja.[26] Noja hypothesis can be summarized like this. Hubal consists of hbl (ھُبَل). The h- or hn- article in Ancient North Arabian was the forerunner of the al- of Arabic. As for bl, it was modified with time from b‘l (بَعْل). With the loss of ‘ayn in the middle of b and l, b‘l became bl. Furthermore, since ha-b‘l means "the lord", or "the god" (Ba‘al was an ancient Canaanite deity) and in classical Arabic it can be written as al-b‘l which would still mean the same thing. Hubal would, therefore, be the ancient correspondent of Allah.

Noja's argument, seductive as it appears, has some serious problems. The inscriptions in the Arabian peninsula can be classified into two groups according to the form of definite article used: h- or hn- on the one hand and on the other ’l-, the precursor of classical Arabic al-.[27] Chronologically speaking, the latter group is regarded as late, since its epigraphic evidence dates only from late 1st century BCE onwards and have been found in central, north and eastern Arabia, Syria and the Negev region. The former group, on the other hand, is evidenced from the middle of the 1st century BCE.

However, the al- group appears to be more ancient as Herodotus stated that the Arabs worshipped a goddess name Alilat, Al-ilat (or Allat, "the goddess").[28] This tells us that this form of Arabic definite article was used as early as the 5th century BCE. However, this does not give us any idea about the dialect in which such an article was used.[29] The idea that the h- or hn- article found in Ancient North Arabian is the ancestor of Arabic ’l- has been suggested by scholars over a long period.[30] This view has come under criticism due to the lack of epigraphic evidence for the transformation of h- or hn- to Arabic ’l-.[31] Theoretically, it can be argued that it could have happened in a number of ways, the problem always come back to the lack of epigraphic evidence for the actual process.[32] Noja assumed a similar transformation from the Ancient North Arabian h- to Arabic ’l-.[33] Not surprisingly, he did not furnish any proof either.

Moreover, for the name b‘l to become bl with the loss of ‘ayn, it would have to have been transmitted through a language such as Akkadian or Punic in which the ‘ayn had disappeared. This would give in Akkadian Bel and in Punic Bol. Both forms were present at Palmyra, but Palmyrene does not use the Ancient North Arabian definite article h- or hn-. Since the word b‘l, with the ‘ayn, exists in Arabic as a common noun, and as the name of a pre-Islamic idol, it would be very difficult to argue that Arabic had received the word or name by this route, let alone why it had been given an Ancient North Arabian definite article.

Those have insisted that according to Islamic sources Hubal was brought from Moab to Arabia. Moab is situated on the east side of the Dead Sea, which is now a part of Jordan. What does the archaeology from this region tells us about Hubal and Ba‘alshamin which originated from Ba‘al? To examine this, let us turn our attention to the Nabataean inscriptions in Arabia, Jordan and Syria where the deities Hubal and Ba‘alshamin are mentioned.

Figure 1: Nabataeans and their trade routes.[34]

The god Hubal, whose name is known from early Arabian sources, was also known apparently to the Nabataeans. Hubal in a Nabataean inscription dated to c. 1 BCE / CE from Mada'in Salih (Hijr or Hegra, Figure 1), north-west of Madinah, appears as hblw. The final -w is typical of Nabataean divine and personal names. The inscription is funerary in character and Hubal's name appears with Dushara and Manōtu (i.e., Manat). The inscription reads:

... p’yty ‘mh ldwšr’ whblw wamnwtw šmdym 5 ...

... [he] shall be liable to Dushara and Hubalu and Manotu in the sum of 5 shamads ...[35]

Despite Hawting's misgivings,[36] there is no doubt about this reading.[37] Another possible occurrence of the name Hubal is in the Nabataean inscription (dated 48 CE) from Pozzuoli near Naples.[38] The reading of J. T. Milik was reported by Starcky, although some doubt remains.[39] The name appears as bnhbl, without the final -w and therefore an exact correspondent of the Arabic form. It was interpreted by Starcky as "son of Hubal".[40] But it can also be interpreted as "Hubal has fashioned".[41] Interestingly, bnhbl also appears in a "Thamudic" inscription from Northern Arabia.[42] Milik and Starcky reported that the name Hubal also appears in a personal name, brhbl, "Son of Hubal", in a dedicatory text dated to 25 BCE.[43] The authors Milik and Starcky regarded it as an Aramaic version of the name found in the Pozzuoli inscription. Based on the epigraphic evidence, Healey says that the cult of Hubal was restricted in Nabataean inscriptions to Hegra. Therefore, Hubal can be considered as a local god and his cult did not spread at all among the Nabataean élite, despite its Arabian origins.[44]

Ba‘alshamin (or Baalshamin, as written in popular literature), b‘lšmn, was a Syrian deity who was incorporated into the Nabataean pantheon. Ba‘alshamin has a long history going back to the second millennium BCE. His origin lies in the great storm and fertility god Ba‘lu of the Ugaritic texts.[45] His specific name appears to be a title of the storm god Hadad whose worship was widespread in Syria and Mesopotamia. He was popular in Palmyra, Hatra and the Edessa region, where he was identified with the local deity Maralahe.[46] Ba‘alshamin was worshipped over a wide area and his popularity gradually spread south.[47] He had a late 1st century BCE temple dedicated to him at Si‘ in Syria. Littmann published a major inscription from Si‘ dedicated to Ba‘alshamin.

In the pious remembrance of Maleikat, the son of Ausū, the son of Mo‘aierū who built for Ba‘al Samīn the inner temple and the outer temple and this theatron and [the (or these watch towers],... and departed from (?) life in peace![48]

From Salkhad in Syria, we have an altar from 72 / 73 CE, dedicated to Ba‘alshamin, god of mtnw. The inscription reads:

This is the cult-stone which was made by ‘Ubaid, the son of ’Utaifik (?) for Ba‘al-Shamīn, the god of Matan (?), in the year 33 of Malik the king, the king of the Nabataeans.[49]

The Nabataean inscription from Bosra dated to the 1st century CE is again dedicated "to Ba‘alshamin, the god of Shu‘aydu" (lb‘lšmn ’lh š‘ydw).[50] Moving further down south in Wadi Musa, near Petra in Jordan, an inscription from the reign of Aretas IV is dedicated lb‘lšmn ’lh mnkw, "to Ba‘alshamin, god of mnkw".[51]

The texts discussed above clearly show that Ba‘alshamin was an official Nabataean deity. Ba‘alshamin moved from his Syrian home to down south[52] and was also worshipped in Northern Arabia by Safaitic people as evidenced by numerous Safaitic inscriptions.[53]

It must be emphasized that in both Nabataean and Safaitic inscriptions Ba‘alshamin is always written as b‘lšmn, i.e., with an ‘ayn between b and l. There is no Nabataean and Safaitic epigraphic evidence which shows that the name b‘l to becoming bl with the loss of ‘ayn, which in turn enabled hb‘l to become hbl. As mentioned earlier the word b‘l, with the ‘ayn, exists in Arabic as a common noun and it is also found in Surah al-Saffat in the Qur'an

"Will ye call upon Ba‘al (b‘l) and forsake the Best of Creators" [Qur'an 37:125]

The Qur'an condemns Ba‘al worship. Moreover, it is also clear that in both the Nabataean and Arabic scripts the difference between Hubal and Ba‘al (with an ‘ayn) always existed, and that they were considered two distinct deities. In the light of archaeological evidence, Noja's and the Christian missionaries' hypothesis that Ha-Ba‘al ("the Lord") became Hubal now becomes completely untenable, let alone Hubal being Allah! There is nothing in this hyperbole that "seriously damages the Muslim claim regarding Allah in pre-Islamic times being the same God of Abraham".

HUBAL - A MOON GOD?

The claim of Christian missionaries that Hubal was a Moon god is based on a citation from Mahmoud Ayoub's Islam: Faith And History.[54] A similar claim was also made by Robert Morey.[55] In fact, the claim that Hubal was a Moon god is rather old. More than 100 years ago Hugo Winckler suggested that there was a Moon god cult in Makkah and that Hubal was a Moon god[56] and it was subsequently repeated by Carl Brockelmann.[57] Such ideas were reinforced by Ditlef Nielsen who claimed that all ancient Arabian religion was a primitive religion of nomads, whose objects of worship were exclusively a triad of the Father-Moon, Mother-Sun and the Son-Venus star envisaged as their child.[58] Not only was this an over-simplified view based on an unproven hypothesis, it is also quite absurd to think that over a millennium-long period during which paganism is known to have flourished, there was not substantial shifts of thinking about the deities. Not surprisingly, Nielsen's triad hypothesis was handed devastating refutation by many scholars.[59] Moreover, the information that we have concerning the nature of Hubal comes from Islamic sources. They do not say that Hubal was a Moon god. On the other hand, the Nabataean sources are silent about him. Clearly, there is no evidence of a connection between Hubal and the Moon. The scholars who have made a connection between Hubal and the Moon have rested their case on flimsy evidence. Not surprisingly, Winckler's claim that Hubal was a Moon god was refuted by Fahd.[60] While dealing with the Nabataean deity Hubal, Healey agrees with Fahd's view. He says:

On the other hand Fahd rightly rejects the attempts by some earlier scholars to connect Hubal with Saturn or the moon... Such suggestions have been based partly on the assumption that all Arabian religion is ultimately astral and partly on the Islamic inheritance of a lunar calendar...[61]

Now that we have covered all the major points, let us briefly touch upon the issue of whether or not Hubal is mentioned in the Bible.

HUBAL IN THE HEBREW BIBLE?

It is also worthwhile point out that attempts were made by Barstad to find a trace of Hubal in the Hebrew Bible. Barstad considered some instances of the word hebel in the Hebrew Bible, usually translated as "vanity" and found frequently as a derogatory term applied to pagan idols, as occurrences of the name of a Canaanite deity related to the Arabian Hubal (e.g., Jer. 10:3 and Zech. 10:2).[62] Bob Becking has strongly rejected these ideas as there is no evidence of any such Canaanite deity. Furthermore, a connection via Moab, a possible source of Hubal at Makkah, is far too flimsy.[63]

3. Conclusions

Those have claimed that Allah is the same as Hubal. Their claims rest on two foundations. Firstly, according to them ‘Abd al-Muttalib's praying to Allah while standing next to the statue of Hubal shows that "Allah to whom Muhammad's grandfather vowed and worshiped was none other than Hubal". We have already shown that there are clear traditions dealing with the Battle of Uhud, as well as other aspects of Islamic history and beliefs, which explicitly differentiate between the worshippers of Hubal and the worshippers of Allah. Surprisingly, this is also acknowledged by those, a clear contradiction of their own stance.

Secondly, those connect Hubal with Ha-Baal, that is, "Muhammad's Allah is actually Hubal, i.e. the Baal of the Moabites". Furthermore, they add that "Hubal being the Arabic for the Hebrew Ha Baal, "the Baal."" Noja made a more sophisticated and ingenious argument regarding the transformation of Ha-Ba‘al to Hubal who is no other than Allah. Using archaeology, it was shown that such a transformation is unlikely. For the name b‘l (i.e., Ba‘al) to become bl (i.e., Baal) with the loss of ‘ayn, it would have to have been transmitted through a language such as Akkadian or Punic in which the ‘ayn had disappeared. This would give in Akkadian Bel and in Punic Bol. Both these forms were present at Palmyra. But the problem is that Palmyrene does not use the Ancient North Arabian definite article h- or hn-. Moreover, the word b‘l, with the ‘ayn, exists in Arabic as a common noun, and as the name of a pre-Islamic idol mentioned in the Qur'an 37:125. The ‘ayn is a proper consonant and it remained pronounced into Islamic times. The Nabataean inscriptions also show a clear distinction between Hubal and Ba‘alshamin (derived from the Ugaritic deity Ba‘lu) always existed, and that they were considered two distinct deities. Thus it would be very difficult to argue that Arabic had received the word or name by either the Palmyrene route, let alone why it had been given an Ancient North Arabian definite article. In other words, the Christian missionaries' hypothesis that Ha-Baal ("the Lord") became Hubal, which was the same as Allah, becomes completely untenable.

And Allah knows best!


References & Notes

[1] N. A. Faris, The Book Of Idols: Being A Translation From The Arabic Of The Kitāb al-Asnām By Hishām Ibn Al-Kalbi, 1952, Princeton Oriental Studies - Volume 14, Princeton University Press: Princeton (NJ), p. 23.

[2] T. Fahd, "Une Pratique Cléromantique A La Ka‘ba Preislamique", Semitica, 1958, Volume 8, pp. 55-79.

[3] P. K. Hitti (Rev. Walid Khalidi), History Of The Arabs, 2002, Revised 10th Edition, Palgrave Macmillan: New York, p. 100.

[4] Abu Walid Muhammad b. ‘Abdullah al-Azraqi (Ed. F. Wustenfeld), Kitab Akhbar Makkah: Die Chroniken Der Stadt Mekka: Gesammelt Und Auf Kosten Der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 1858, Volume 1, F.A. Brockhaus: Leipzig, p. 31 and p. 73.

[5] N. A. Faris, The Book Of Idols: Being A Translation From The Arabic Of The Kitāb al-Asnām By Hishām Ibn Al-Kalbi, 1952, op. cit., p. 7.

[6] ‘Abd al-Malik Ibn Hisham (Ed. F. Wüstenfeld), Kitab Sirat Rasulallah: Das Leben Muhammed's Nach Muhammed Ibn Ishâk, 1859, Dieterichsche Universitats - Buchhandlung: Gottingen, p. 51; Also see A. Guillaume, The Life Of Muhammad: A Translation Of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 2004 (18th Impression), Oxford University Press: Karachi, p. 701, note 63.

[7] Abu Al-Fida Isma‘il Ibn Kathir (Trans. T. Le Gassick), The Life Of The Prophet Muhammad: A Translation Of Al-Sira Al-Nabawiyya, 1998, Volume 1, Garnet Publishing Ltd.: Reading (UK), p. 42.

[8] The lack of a consensus in Islamic traditions concerning the origin of the Hubal idol is also pointed out by Western scholarship. See T. Fahd, "Hubal" in B. Lewis, V. L. Menage, Ch. Pellat and J. Schacht (Eds.), Encyclopaedia of Islam (New Edition), 1971, Volume III, E. J. Brill: Leiden & Luzac & Co.: London, p. 537; More recently also by J. F. Healey, The Religion Of Nabataeans: A Conspectus, 2001, Religions In The Graeco-Roman World - Volume 136, Brill: Leiden, p. 130.

Compare this to Cook's complete assuredness regarding Hubal's Moabite origins. See M. Cook, Muhammad, 1996, Oxford University Press: Oxford (UK), p. 37.

[9] J. Wellhausen, Reste Arabischen Heidentums Gesammelt Und Erläutert, 1897, Druck Und Verlag Von Georg Reimer: Berlin, p. 218. The German text reads:

Ganz in dem selben Sinne nun wird Allah ursprünglich gesagt und verstanden sein, nicht im Gegensatz gegen den besonders benannten Stammgott, sondern als appellatives Attribut desselben. Allah war also zunächst innerhalb jedes einzelnen Stammes der gewöhnlich statt des Eigennamens gebrauchte Titel des Stammgottes; alle sagten sie Allah und jeder verstand seinen Gott. Aber der Ausdruck "der Gott", der im sprachlichen Verkehr fast die Alleinherrschaft bekam, bildete nun den Übergang zu dem Gedanken eines identischen, allen Stämmen gemeinsamen, einen und allgemeinen Gottes.

[10] ibid., p. 85. The German text reads:

Das vornehmste Geschlecht von Bagila hiess Ahmas Allah, Allah war islamischer Ersatz für irgend welchen Götzennamen.

[11] ibid., pp. 75-76. On p. 75 Wellhausen says:

Der Dienst dieser Göttinnen war nun allerdings sehr viel weiter verbreitet als der des Hubal; doch sollte man denken, bei einer Polemik gegen den Götzendienst eben der Mekkaner wäre dringende Veranlassung gewesen, den spezifisch mekkanischen Gott der Ka‘ba nicht zu vergessen. Statt dessen wird von Muhammad vorausgesetzt und auch von seinen Gegnern zugestanden, das Allah der Herr der Ka‘ba sei. Ist etwa der Allah von Mekka Hubal? mit anderen Worten wurde Hubal in Mekka Allah genannt, ungefähr so wie Jahve in Israel Elohim.

[12] See for example, Ibn Warraq, Why I Am Not A Muslim, 1995, Prometheus Books: Amherst (NY), p. 39.

[13] T. Fahd, Le Panthéon De L'Arabie Centrale A La Veille De L'Hégire, 1968, Institut Français D'Archéologie De Beyrouth Bibliothèque Archéologique Et Historique - Volume 88 , Librairie Orientaliste Paul Guethner: Paris, pp. 95-96.

[14] A. Guillaume, The Life Of Muhammad: A Translation Of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 2004 (18th Impression), op. cit., p. 386.

[15] Safi-ur Rahman al-Mubarakpuri, Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum [The Sealed Nectar], 1996, First Edition, Maktaba Dar-us-Salam: Riyadh (Saudi Arabia), p. 392; I. K. Poonawala (Trans.), History Of Al-Tabari, Volume IX: The Last Years Of The Prophet - The Formation of the State A.D. 630-632 / A.H. 8-11, 1990, State University Of New York Press: Albany (NY), p. 45; P. K. Hitti (Trans.), The Origins Of The Islamic State Being A Translation Of Kitāb Futūh al-Buldān Of Abu Al-Abbas Ahmad Bin Jabir Al-Baladhuri, 2002, Gorgias Press: Piscataway (NJ), pp. 62-63; "Abu Sufyan" in E. van Donzel, Islamic Desk Reference: Compiled From The Encyclopaedia Of Islam, 1994, E. J. Brill: Leiden, p. 15; F. E. Peters, Muhammad And The Origins Of Islam, 1994, State University of New York Press: Albany (NY), p. 235.

[16] A. Guillaume, The Life Of Muhammad: A Translation Of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 2004 (18th Impression), op. cit., p. 547.

[17] I. K. Poonawala (Trans.), History Of Al-Tabari, Volume IX: The Last Years Of The Prophet - The Formation of the State A.D. 630-632 / A.H. 8-11, 1990, op. cit., pp. 44-46.

[18] "Some faces that day shall be shinning and radiant, gazing upon their Lord." [Surah al-Qiyamah, 75:22-23]

[19] Holding the Islamic corpus in deep suspicion, Pavel Pavlovitch simply ignores this important contradistinction whilst subtly hinting that Allah and Hubal are in fact one and the same entity. See P. Pavlovitch, "Qad kunna la na‘budu 'llaha wa-la na‘rifuhu. On the Problem of the Pre-Islamic Lord of the Ka‘ba", Journal Of Arabic And Islamic Studies, 1998/1999, Volume II, pp. 49–74. Available online. Also see here for response and counter response.

[20] P. Crone, Meccan Trade And The Rise Of Islam, 1987, Princeton University Press: New Jersey (NJ), pp. 193-194.

[21] H. R. Alker, Rediscoveries And Reformulations: Humanistic Methodologies For International Studies, 1996, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, p. 271, footnote 646.

[22] F. E. Peters, Muhammad And The Origins Of Islam, 1994, State University of New York Press: New York, pp. 109-110.

[23] G. E. von Grunebaum, Classical Islam: A History, 600 A.D. To 1258 A.D., 2005 (Paperback), AldineTransaction: New Brunswick (NJ), p. 25.

[24] A. Guillaume, The Life Of Muhammad: A Translation Of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 2004 (18th Impression), op. cit., p. 68. ‘Abd al-Muttalib's praying to Allah whilst standing next to the statue of Hubal is mysteriously transformed by Robert Morey to claim that the pagans from Makkah "prayed to Hubal using the name Allah". See R. Morey, A Reply To Shabbir Ally's Attack On Dr. Robert Morey: An Analysis Of Shabbir Ally's False Accusation And Unscholarly Research, n.d., Faith Defenders: Orange (CA), p. 5; R. A. Morey, Winning The War Against Radical Islam, 2002, Christian Scholars Press: Las Vegas (NV), Appendix, p. vii.

[25] In the Western literature on Islam, the belief in one true God, i.e., Allah, by pagan Arabs becomes belief in a "High God". See W. M. Watt, "Belief In A "High God" In Pre-Islamic Mecca", Journal Of Semitic Studies, 1971, Volume 16, pp. 35-40; idem., "The Qur'an And Belief In A "High God"", Der Islam, 1979, Volume 56, pp. 205-211, U. Rubin, "Al-Samad And The High God: An Interpretation Of Sūra CXII", Der Islam, 1984, Volume 61, pp. 197-217.

[26] S. Noja, "Hubal = Allah", Rendiconti: Istituto Lombardo Accademia Di Scienze E Lettere, 1994, Volume 128, pp. 283-295.

As for a less-than-sophisticated argument of associating Hubal with Ba‘al, Khairat al-Saleh says:

Hubal was associated with the Semitic god Ba‘l and with Adonis or Tammuz, the gods of spring, fertility, agriculture and plenty.

See K. Al-Saleh, Fabled Cities, Princes & Jinn From Arab Myths And Legends, 1985, Schocken Books: New York & Douglas & McIntyre:Vancouver / Toronto, p. 28.

[27] A. F. L. Beeston, "Languages Of Pre-Islamic Arabia", Arabica, 1981, Volume 28, p. 181; M. C. A. Macdonald, "Reflections On The Linguistic Map Of Pre-Islamic Arabia", Arabian Archaeology And Epigraphy, 2000, Volume 11, p. 29, Figure 1, pp. 41-42 and pp. 48-50; C. Rabin, Ancient West Arabian, 1951, Taylor's Foreign Press: London, pp. 35-36. Rabin discusses am- and an- articles found in some Yemeni dialects.

[28] Herodotus (Ed. & Trans. by G. Rawlinson), The History Of Herodotus, 1934, Tudor Publishing Company: New York, p. 148, 3.8. Also available online. This important point concerning the use of article al- in Al-ilat was also highlighted by A. F. L. Beeston, "Languages Of Pre-Islamic Arabia", Arabica, 1981, op. cit., p. 181; Also see M. C. A. Macdonald, "Reflections On The Linguistic Map Of Pre-Islamic Arabia", Arabian Archaeology And Epigraphy, 2000, op. cit., p. 41 and p. 49.

[29] M. C. A. Macdonald, "Reflections On The Linguistic Map Of Pre-Islamic Arabia", Arabian Archaeology And Epigraphy, 2000, op. cit., p. 49.

[30] For example, see A. J. Wensinck, "The Article Of Determination In Arabic", Mededelingen Der Koninklijke (Nederlandse) Akademie Van Wetenschappen. Afdeeling Letterkunde, 1931, Volume 71, No. 3, pp. 1-18; W. Vycichl, "L'origine De L'article Défini de L'arabe", Comptes Rendus Du Groupe Linguistique D'études Chamito-Sémitiques, 1973-1978, Volume 18-23, pp. 713-719.

Winnett had used the Lihyanite and Thamudic inscriptions which use h- or hn- article to claim that h-lh or h-’lh represent the name Allah or Al-ilah, respectively (F. V. Winnett, "Allah Before Islam", The Moslem World, 1938, Volume 28, pp. 241-247). Similarly, Allat and al-‘Uzza were called h-lt (or hn-lt) and hn-‘z’ (F. V. Winnett, "The Daughters Of Allah", The Moslem World, 1940, Volume 30, pp. 120-123). Winnett assumed that the deity who appears in the Ancient North Arabian inscriptions as lh was identical to "Allah". Similarly, the deity who appears in the Ancient North Arabian inscriptions as ’lh was assumed to be identical with both lh and Allah. In the same vein, the deity who appears in the Ancient North Arabian inscriptions h-’lh was assumed to be identical with lh, ’lh and Allah. These assumptions are not justified by any evidence. On the other hand, ’lh and ’lt are ordinary nouns meaning "god" and "goddess", the former being comparable to Arabic ilah. H-’lh and h(n)-’lt mean literally "the god" and "the goddess". For h(n)-’lt see I. Rabinowitz, "Aramaic Inscriptions Of The Fifth Century B.C.E. From A North-Arab Shrine In Egypt", Journal Of Near Eastern Studies, 1956, Volume 15, pp. 1-9; idem., "Another Aramaic Record Of The North-Arabian Goddess Han-'Ilat", Journal Of Near Eastern Studies, 1959, Volume 18, pp. 154-155.

[31] F. Rundgren, "The Form Of The Definite Article In Arabic" in M. Macuch, C. Müller-Kessler & B.G. Fragner (Eds.), Studia Semitica Necnon Iranica Rudolpho Macuch Septuagenario Ab Amicis Et Discipulis Dedicata, 1989, Otto Harrassowitz: Wiesbaden, pp. 257-269; D. D. Testen, Parallels In Semitic Linguistics: The Development Of Arabic la- And Related Semitic Particles, 1998, Studies In Semitic Languages And Linguistics - Volume 26, Brill: Leiden, pp. 135-182.

[32] M. C. A. Macdonald, "Reflections On The Linguistic Map Of Pre-Islamic Arabia", Arabian Archaeology And Epigraphy, 2000, op. cit., pp. 48-49.

[33] S. Noja, "Hubal = Allah", Rendiconti: Istituto Lombardo Accademia Di Scienze E Lettere, 1994, op. cit., pp. 291-292.

[34] J. F. Healey, The Religion Of Nabataeans: A Conspectus, 2001, op. cit., Map I.

[35] J. F. Healey, The Nabataean Tomb Inscriptions Of Mada'in Salih: Edited With Introduction And Commentary, 1993, Journal Of Semitic Studies Supplement - 1, Oxford University Press on Behalf of University of Manchester, p. 154, H 16.

[36] G. R. Hawting, The Idea Of Idolatry And The Emergence Of Islam: From Polemic To History, 1999, Cambridge Studies In Islamic Civilization, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, p. 113, note 5.

[37] J. F. Healey, The Religion Of Nabataeans: A Conspectus, 2001, op. cit., p. 128.

[38] Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum Ab Academia Inscriptionum Et Litterarum Humaniorum Conditum Atque Digestum, 1889, Pars Secunda (Inscriptiones Aramaicas Continens), Tomus 1, E Reipublicae Typographeo: Parisiis, No. 158, pp. 185-187. For the picture of the inscription see Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum Ab Academia Inscriptionum Et Litterarum Humaniorum Conditum Atque Digestum, 1889, Pars Secunda (Inscriptiones Aramaicas Continens), Tomus 1 (Tabulæ), E Reipublicae Typographeo: Parisiis, Plate XXII, No. 158.

[39] J. Starcky, "Pétra Et La Nabatène" in L. Pirot, A. Robert, H. Cazelles & A. Feuillet, Dictionnaire De La Bible - Supplément, 1966, Volume 7, Letouzey & Ané, Éditeurs: Paris, col. 998.

[40] ibid.

[41] J. F. Healey, The Religion Of Nabataeans: A Conspectus, 2001, op. cit., p. 128.

[42] J. Starcky, "Pétra Et La Nabatène" in L. Pirot, A. Robert, H. Cazelles & A. Feuillet, Dictionnaire De La Bible - Supplément, 1966, Volume 7, op. cit., col. 998, col. 999-1000.

[43] J. T. Milik & J. Starcky, "Inscriptions Récemment Découvertes À Pétra", Annual Of The Department Of Antiquities Of Jordan, 1975, Volume 20, pp. 121-124, especially p. 122, No. 5.

[44] J. F. Healey, The Religion Of Nabataeans: A Conspectus, 2001, op. cit., p. 37.

[45] ibid., p. 124.

[46] H. J. W. Drijvers & J. F. Healey, The Old Syriac Inscriptions Of Edessa And Osrhoene: Texts, Translations And Commentary, 1999, Handbuch der Orientalistik - Volume 42, Brill: Leiden, p. 80.

[47] J. Teixidor, The Pagan God: Popular Religion In The Greco-Roman Near East, 1977, Princeton University Press: Princeton (NJ), pp. 29-40.

[48] E. Littmann, Semitic Inscriptions, 1904, Part IV Of The Publications Of An American Archaeological Expedition To Syria In 1899-1900, The Century Co.: New York, pp. 85-90, No. 1.

[49] E. Littmann, Semitic Inscriptions, Section A: Nabataean Inscriptions From Southern Hauran, 1914, Publications Of The Princeton University Archaeological Expeditions To Syria In 1904-1905 And 1909 (Division IV), E. J. Brill: Leyden, pp. 21-22, No. 23.

[50] Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum Ab Academia Inscriptionum Et Litterarum Humaniorum Conditum Atque Digestum, 1889, Pars Secunda (Inscriptiones Aramaicas Continens), Tomus 1, op. cit., No. 176, pp. 204-205. For the picture of the inscription see Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum Ab Academia Inscriptionum Et Litterarum Humaniorum Conditum Atque Digestum, 1889, Pars Secunda (Inscriptiones Aramaicas Continens), Tomus 1 (Tabulæ), op. cit., Plate XXIV, No, 176.

[51] N. I. Khairy (With An Additional Note By J. T. Milik), "A New Dedicatory Nabataean Inscription From Wadi Musa", Palestine Exploratory Quarterly, 1981, Volume 113, pp. 19-26, especially Milik's note on pp. 25-26.

[52] D. Tarrier, "Baalshamin Dans Le Monde Nabatéen: À Propos De Découvertes Récentes", Aram, 1990, Volume 2, pp. 197-203.

[53] E. Littmann, Semitic Inscriptions, Section C: Safaitic Inscriptions, 1943, Publications Of The Princeton University Archaeological Expeditions To Syria (Division IV), E. J. Brill: Leiden, index on p. 344 for details; J. F. Healey, The Religion Of Nabataeans: A Conspectus, 2001, op. cit., p. 126; M. C. A. Macdonald, "Safaitic" in C. E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, W. P. Heinrichs & G. Lecomte (Eds.), The Encyclopaedia Of Islam (New Edition), 1995, Volume VIII, E. J. Brill: Leiden, p. 761.

[54] M. M. Ayoub, Islam: Faith And History, 2004, Oneworld Publications: Oxford (England), p. 15.

[55] R. Morey, A Reply To Shabbir Ally's Attack On Dr. Robert Morey: An Analysis Of Shabbir Ally's False Accusation And Unscholarly Research, n.d., op. cit., p. 28; Also see R. A. Morey, Winning The War Against Radical Islam, 2002, op. cit., Appendix, p. xxxv and p. 11 for an allusion.

[56] H. Winckler, Arabisch, Semitisch, Orientalisch: Kulturgeschichtlich-Mythologische Untersuchung, 1901, W. Peiser: Berlin, p. 83

der Gott, der in Mekka verehrt wurde, muss also, da Muhammad den mondkult lehrt, ein mondgott gewesen sein; sein Name ist bekannt, es war Hobal. Wellhausen hat hierfür völlig beweisende belege gegeben. Hobal war für Mekka was Sin für Harran, Marduk für Babylon. Er gleich dem Allah Muhammeds wie die altgermanischen u. altslavischen götter den neu eingeführten Christusgotte der oft noch in der Form seines Vorgangers weiter verehrt wurde, oder doch sehr in den Schatten treten musste neben einem Heiligen, der die Züge des alten Heidengottes trug.

One can see colossal ignorance about Islam here! Also see H. Winckler, "Himmels = Und Weltenbild Der Babylonier", Der Alte Orient, 1901, Volume 3, pp. 55-56.

[57] C. Brockelmann (Trans. J. Carmichael & M. Perlmann), History Of The Islamic Peoples, 1949, Routledge & Kegan Paul Limited: London, p. 9 and p. 12.

[58] D. Nielsen, Handbuch Der Altarabischen Altertumskunde, 1927, Volume I (Die Alterarabische Kultur), Nyt Nordisk Forlag: Kopenhagen, pp. 177-250. For the discussion on the triad of moon, sun and the Venus star in semitic pantheon see pp. 213-234.

[59] G. Furlani, "Triadi Semitiche E Trinità Cristiana", Bulletin De L'Institut D'Égypte, 1924, Volume 6, pp. 115-133; A. Jamme, "Le Panthéon Sud-Arabe Préislamique D'Après Les Sources Épigraphiques", Le Muséon, 1947, Volume 60, pp. 57-147; A. Jamme, "D. Nielsen Et Le Pantheon Sub-Arabe Préislamique", Revue Biblique, 1948, Volume 55, pp. 227-244.

Joseph Henninger has written a series of articles discussing and refuting Nielsen's thesis. See J. Henninger, "Das Opfer In Den Altsüdarabischen Hochkulturen", Anthropos, 1942-1945, Volume 37-40, pp. 802-805; idem., "Über Sternkunde Und Sternkult In Nord- Und Zentralarabien", Zeitschrift Für Ethnologie, 1954, Volume 79, pp. 107-10; idem., "Menschenopfer Bei Den Araben", Anthropos, 1958, Volume 53, p. 743. More recently J. Henninger, "Pre-Islamic Bedouin Religion" in M. L. Swartz (Trans. & Ed.), Studies In Islam, 1981, Oxford University Press: Oxford & New York, pp. 3-22. He describes Neilsen's theories "dubious" and "too speculative" which "met with strong opposition" (p. 4).

[60] T. Fahd, Le Panthéon De L'Arabie Centrale A La Veille De L'Hégire, 1968, op. cit., pp. 102-103; Also see T. Fahd, "Une Pratique Cléromantique A La Ka‘ba Preislamique", Semitica, 1958, op. cit., pp. 75-76.

[61] J. F. Healey, The Religion Of Nabataeans: A Conspectus, 2001, op. cit., p. 131. It is worth mentioning ‘Abdallah ‘Abd al-Fadi's claim that Ka‘bah was the house of Saturn. Not surprisingly, he did not provide any evidence for such a claim. See ‘Abdallah ‘Abd al-Fadi, Is The Qur'an Infallible?, 1995, Light of Life: Villach (Austria), pp. 54-55.

[62] H. M. Barstad, "HBL Als Bezeichnung Der Fremden Götter Im Alten Testament Und Der Gott Hubal", Studia Theologica, 1978, Volume 32, pp. 57-65.

[63] B. Becking, "Does Jeremiah X 3 Refer To A Canaanite Deity Called Hubal?", Vetus Testamentum, 1993, Volume 43, No. 4, pp. 555-557; B. Becking, "Hubal" in K. van der Toorn, B. Becking & P. W. van der Horst (Eds.), Dictionary Of Deities And Demons In The Bible DDD, 1999, Second Extensively Revised Edition, Brill: Leiden & Eerdmans: Grand Rapids (MI), p. 430.

M S M Saifullah & `Abdullah David

© Islamic Awareness, All Rights Reserved.

 
< Prev   Next >
Contact Us
The Miraculous Quran