Sheikh Imran Hosein Responding To Questions From The Saker (PART 1)

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

• View (active tab)
• Contact

Author's articles

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.Kiev Dragging Feet on Artillery Pullout Because It Wants out of Minsk Agreement

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

Islam - Sheikh Imran Hosein Latest- Interview By Morris - Published on 17 May 2014

MUHAMMAD AL-'ASI - HARB MEGIDDO (ARMAGEDDON) 2013

HARB MEGIDDO (ARMAGEDDON) 2013!

Dedicated to

Washington D.C. Imâm Muhammad al-‘Asi, Adalberto Erazo Jr. and Kathleen Bates.

http://muhammad-ali-ben-marcus.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/muhammad-al-asi-harb-megiddo-armageddon.html 

André Rieu - The Beautiful Blue Danube

André Rieu & his Johann Strauss Orchestra playing "The Beautiful Blue Danube" (An der schönen blauen Donau) by composer Johann Strauss II. Recorded live at Empress Sisi's castle; Schönbrunn Palace Vienna, Austria with dancers from the famous Austrian Elmayer Dancing School.

Published on 25 Mar 2015

John Friend& Jeff Rense - Dear White People: Your Days Are Numbered: 3.23.15

  Terrorist, Apartheid and Ethnic Cleansing Israel (TAECI), built on stolen Palestinian lands thanks to a decadent Christendom, a decadent Nation of Muhammad, and to the Totalitarian Terrorist United Nations Dictatorship has a lot more in store for Christians, Muslims, Palestinians (Lebanese, Phoenicians, Arameans, Canaanites, Syrians, etc.), Arabs, Egyptians, and the entire world in general.  

 L'invention de la religion juive, une leçon du professeur Henri Atlan

ISRAEL, DIABOLICAL CRYPTO JEWS, AL-YAHUD, AS-SAUD, AL-CIA, AS-SHAYTAAN!
 LA VALSE CONTINUE NON STOP!  THE WALTZ CONTINUES NON STOP!











 



Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
 Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.


Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

 Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
 Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
 Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

 Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

 Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.


Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
 Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.



Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.




Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

The Real Exodus: End of Israel

Posted by Dr. Ashraf Ezzat on April 17, 2015

  “Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites”

“The Hebrew clergy/illuminati, equipped with Talmudic & Pharisaic opportunism and deceit, decided to erase the Israelites’ remote Arabian history and invent a whole new one in Egypt and Palestine”

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

By Dr. Ashraf Ezzat

---

History doesn’t only shape our reality but it is also crucial for our decision making. If our reality was devoid of any past experience, I couldn’t see how we could plan for a better future.
Though history is long-gone, it remains the only thing to learn from, as the future has not yet come into existence.  And if we learned from a false or tampered with history then all our perceptions of reality will be wrong. If we were given/inherited a fake history we would be bound to indefinitely linger in falsehood.

The real history is not necessarily the stories you were told in the school. The real history is the one you will discover yourself. Unless you make the effort and embark on a quest for the truth, you may never know what really happened. The first step on the road to truth is to doubt all the stories you were told happened in the past.

With some critical thinking employed, many of us have come to doubt and question some of the modern stories dished out to us by mainstream politics and media. One blatant example is the official story of 911. We simply can’t buy it, for first and foremost the story doesn’t make sense.
And if we are entitled to question stories as recent as 911 and WW II, who can deny us the same right when dealing with ancient stories.

Defying academia and breaking stereotypes.
Never make the mistake of believing that old stories can not be doubted for they are history now. History might be gone already but could still be seen differently. If old stories are properly investigated they could be revisited /reinterpreted again. For like 911, many old stories just don’t make any sense.

No matter whom you are, and no matter where you are (America, Africa, Australia, etc.), whether you’re a man of faith (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) or not, there are some stories, old stories that have contributed to your reality.  The ancient story of the Israelite Exodus from Egypt is one of those stories.

The story of Pharaoh and Moses is not just any story. It is at the root of the core belief of all Jews, Muslims and Christians. It is the ultimate display of God’s might and his watching over his so called chosen people. It is the ultimate thriller in otherwise, a completely dreary story of the Israelites and their Promised Land.

The story of Pharaoh and Moses is simply a blockbuster. Hollywood never failed to turn the Exodus story into multi-million dollars business. At the same time films about Moses/Pharaoh (from Cecil B. DeMille’s Ten commandments 1923/1956 to Ridley Scott’s Exodus: Gods and Kings 2014) have managed to turn that historically unverified story into an unshakable truth in the minds of generations of gullible and uneducated masses.

The story of Moses/Pharaoh is so mesmerizing it’s often used as a starter (hors-d’oeuvre) when indoctrinating the kids into any of the Abrahamic religions. It is always so much easier to talk the kids into their ancestors’ faith after telling them that ancient and epical story.

Maybe as a grown-up you don’t fully appreciate the powerful impact the story of Pharaoh/Moses had on you. But actually looking back many years ago, it could turn out that this story is one of the main reasons why you are now such a devout Jew /Muslim /Christian.

In case you are not that religious, there is no denying that the same story of Pharaoh and Moses is responsible for many of the stereotypes lurking in the back of your mind. I mean, could you deny that whenever Egypt is mentioned an uncontrollable visual association with Moses’ ruthless Pharaoh is instantly evoked in your mind.

Egypt and Pharaohs have become almost identical and inseparable mental associations. Whenever we are talking about Egypt, then we must be talking about Pharaohs.

And therefore the ousting of the Egyptian President Mubarak, an incident 3500 years away from Exodus, has been seen as the fall of the last Pharaoh (lingering stereotype)

The same stereotype has infiltrated the realm of academia. Egyptology is an established science for studying ancient Egyptian history and civilization. Unfortunately, Archeologists and historians of ancient Egypt are also referring to ancient Egypt as Pharaonic Egypt. The reason for that is not scientific research or any archeological findings rather the Egyptologists’ Bible-geared mindset. (The word Pharaoh has never been found in ancient Egyptian records)

There is a weird Hollywood insistence on pinpointing one of Egypt’s most glorious kings, Ramses II 1279–1213 BC, as the Pharaoh of Moses. But little did Mr. Demille or Mr. Scott know when they made their films that Ramses (Greek name) is not the actual (Egyptian) name of the king they chose to defame. Actually King Ramses II official (coronation) name isUsermaatre Setepenre (does that look anything like Pharaoh?)

With that bias archeologists have embarked on their extensive excavations in Egypt and Palestine. In this way, most archeologists didn’t set out to seek the historical truth, rather to enforce their Biblical narrative on the ancient history of Egypt and Palestine. An obvious example of that predisposition is the archeological work in the first half of the 20^th century by the American school of oriental research in Jerusalem headed by William F. Albright.

Usually religious clerics and academic scholars don’t see eye to eye when it comes to ancient history. The one thing they both agree upon though is that ancient Egypt was ruled by so called Pharaohs and that from Egypt that Moses led the epic Exodus of the Israelites. But guess what? They both are deadly wrong. For Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor any Israelites.

Actually the Hebrew book of tales, also known as the Hebrew Bible, never referred to Egypt as the land of the Exodus. The Story of Pharaoh and Moses according to the Hebrew book happened in a place called ‘Mizraim/Misrim’

Mizraim is an obscure little village in south west of ancient Arabia and Faraon/فرعون (according to classical Arabic historians) was the Arabic title of its chieftain.

Some might wonder what on earth ancient Arabia has to do with Moses and Pharaoh. Actually, it was in ancient Arabia and North Yemen where the Israelites and Judaism really first appeared (Nothing in this world works in the way you think it does; history included)

Judaism is one of ancient Arabia’s cults that had absolutely nothing to do with the Roman Catholic Church or its Christianity. (Linking Judaism to Christianity is the result of a later Roman-Jewish deception) Hence the ‘Old-New Testament / Judeo-Christian’ epithet is nothing but a political setup.   Actually the fraud kicked off by the Jewish-Greek complicity during the translation of the Hebrew book to the Greek language.

Moreover, the Israelites tribe and all their stories (of Abraham/Ibrahim in Arabic, Isaac/Ishaak, Jacob/Yaakob, Joseph/Youssef, and Moses/Moussa) took place in South Arabia and Northern Yemen. (Zionists cannot have a damn claim to modern day Yemen for, as explained in the book, the Yemenite Israelites have long perished)

‘Come now therefore, and I will send thee unto Faraon, that thou mayest bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Mizraim.’ Exodus 3-10
ז  וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה, רָאֹה רָאִיתִי אֶת-עֳנִי עַמִּי אֲשֶׁר בְּמִצְרָיִם; וְאֶת-צַעֲקָתָם שָׁמַעְתִּי מִפְּנֵי נֹגְשָׂיו, כִּי יָדַעְתִּי” אֶתמַכְאֹבָיו.”

In my recent book, Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites, I join a community of high profile scholars in exposing a two-thousand-year conspiracy. (All the evidence-based findings and research are cited in the book)

In the second century BC, the Hebrew Bible was translated to Greek at the legendary library of Alexandria.

Seventy Jewish scribes, hence the designation Septuagint Bible, were assigned this task by the Ptolemies (Greek monarchy of Egypt) in which they cunningly replaced this obscure Mizraim and its Faraon with the mighty Egypt and its king (Rulers of ancient Egypt were called kings and queens and not Pharaohs).

The Greek forged version, with this malicious distortion of ancient history, has been the source for all translations of the Bible worldwide ever since. (The source of even the Bible tucked under your pillow  … heh)

Generations after generations have been fed this fake story of Pharaoh of Egypt and Moses of the Israelites. What added to the drama and made it all the more mesmerizing is the fact that Egypt, with its fame and glory in the ancient world, had been the theatre of the Exodus story.

From tribe to Empire (The real story of Exodus)
May be this never crossed your mind, but If it wasn’t for Egypt and its splendor the Israelite tales wouldn’t have appealed to the masses. They wouldn’t have propagated beyond the confines of the Hebrew book. Try and retell the Exodus story as it had actually occurred in an obscure and small Arabian village called Mizraim.

Tell the story of Moses, the Yemenite Israelite, who was dumped as a newborn infant in one of the river streams of Southern Arabia. Moses was picked up and raised in the household of فرعون/Faraon (not Pharaoh). Being the chieftain of Mizraim, a transit-village for ancient caravan trade, Faraon was a wealthy and powerful man.

As a young boy, Moses herded sheep and when turned into a strong man he helped Faraon attending the caravan’s merchants and their needs. Camel Caravans that had been crossing the arid Arabian desert for weeks – carrying shipments of spices, frankincense, textile and ivory- usually stayed at Mizraim for a couple of days for rest and resupply of water and food.

That’s why Mizraim as a transit-village had to have as many storehouses as possible. Whenever a caravan stopped at Mizraim, the valuable cargo/commodities carried by the camels would be unloaded and stored in the storehouses.

In that way Mizraim served as a store city and as the business of Faroan prospered he always needed more storecities/storhouses (that’s what the Israelite slaves toiled all day building for Faraon/فرعون) The Israelite slaves were actually forced into building brick stone storehouses (not Pyramids and Temples for crying out loud)

“Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh store-cities” Exodus 1-11

Faraon whose name by the way was Al Waleed bin Musaab, kept a small garrison of guards to protect his lucrative business and safeguard the valuable cargo of the camel trains which cut across ancient Arabia from Yemen in the south to Petra and Egypt in the North.

And since slavery was a pervasive culture/trade in ancient Arabia (ancient Egypt didn’t practice slavery by the way), Faraon had a couple of hundred slaves who worked for him. Ancient Arabia was a tribal culture, and most of the slaves in Mizraim were from the Israelites’ tribe (originally from North Yemen)

Being an Israelite Moses had to defend a fellow Israelite when attacked by a garrison guard. Moses killed the guard. Moses had to explain himself and apologize for Faraon but he didn’t. Instead Moses, accompanied by a couple of hundred of the Israelite slaves fled Mizraim (the Hebrew Bible estimate is 600000 slaves that would approximate to 2 million if children and livestock were included – part of the Septuagint forgery and fraud)

The escape coincided with the break of a mighty storm (some sources say earthquake) which hit Mizraim and the desert all around it.  On hearing the news of the slaves’ escape Faraon and his garrison followed them. While crossing the same river stream Moses had been dumped in before, some of the garrison guards stumbled and fell in the water. Hurdled by the tempest and many wounded guards Faraon called off his pursuit of the Israelite slaves, some say he also drowned. End of story. (If you’re wondering about the ten plagues; we will get to that at the end of this post)

Now, try and take the land of Egypt with its Pyramids, temples, music, riches, costumes, culture, sculpture, priests, military chariots, people and River Nile out of the Exodus Story and then see what you’ve got (not much left for Mr. DeMille or Mr.Scott eh?)

That’s right, you will end up with a totally different story; boring and irrelevant to any audience except may be the sheep herders and tribesmen from ancient Arabia.

Could you see why the Jewish scribes thought it was not a bad idea to relocate the theater of their stories from the obscure and small Mizraim to the land of the Pyramids and the Nile ? From the tribe to the Empire.

Translating the Hebrew Bible to Greek gave the Jewish scribes the golden opportunity to disseminate their tribal stories far and wide. Faking the Exodus story also ensured the whole Levant as the Israelites’ Promised Land instead of a small and obscure piece of the arid Arabian Desert in North Yemen.

Surely the Jewish scribes didn’t blow the opportunity, even if it meant tainting the whole history of ancient Egypt and messing up the history of the whole Ancient World. (Not to mention deceiving generations of credulous believers)

First tide of Jewish migration to Palestine (The perfect crime)
In the second century BC, a very important turn of politics and linguistics was taking place across the Mediterranean and the whole ancient Levant; the Greek rise to power as the new Empire, and the replacement of Hebrew by Aramaic tongue in the Levant and the ancient Egyptian (Demotic) by the new Coptic Greek language in Egypt.

After the decline of the ancient caravan trade (which sustained the Yemenite Hebrews for centuries), new influx of immigrant Jews from Arabia to the Levant (Palestine, Jordan and Lebanon and Syria) started as early as the 3^rd -4^th century BC.  As the new naval route and its new economics was replacing the ancient caravan trade, the Yemenite/Arabian Jews simply followed the money (Ancient Jewish trait).

Since the new trade centers were scattered across the north and east coast of the Mediterranean e.g. Carthage (Tunisia), Alexandria (Egypt) and Tyre (Lebanon), that’s where the new Jewish immigrants headed to.

But the majority settled in Palestine (already inhabited by Phoenicians and the descendants of Peleset/Sea people) Later known as the Palestinians (Distinctly different from the Biblical Philistines – topic for an upcoming post)

Bit by bit, the new generations of immigrant Jews, not the Israelites, to Palestine, in their new settlements and with their new Aramaic tongue began to lose ties with ancient Arabia. Hence, the Jewish clergy/illuminati, from the Hasmonean dynasty 140 BC–37 BC, embarked on a malevolent scheme for establishing a parallel Jewish history in Palestine (a scheme that has recently been revived by the Zionists)

The Hebrew clergy/illuminati, equipped with Talmudic & Pharisaic opportunism and deceit, decided to erase the Israelites’ remote Arabian history and invent a whole new one in Egypt and Palestine (Talmudic laws allow such deceptions and devious Machiavellian conduct)

The gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has exposed their money to Israel, so Jews May Lie to Non-Jews (Baba Kamma 37b) 
 Jews may use lies (“subterfuges”) to circumvent a Gentile (Baba Kamma 113a.) … teachings from the Jewish Talmud

The Hebrew scribes had kept the ancient stories, with the bits and pieces about God’s chosen people and the Promised Land, but projected it all over their new settlements in Palestine. Hell, they had even built a new parallel temple (so called second temple that was demolished by the Romans in 70 AD)

New fake Jewish history had been fabricated, while the (Real) oral history and the Israelites remote Arabian memories kept on fading away over the long years. 
But the Jewish Rabbis, Rab/رب is Arabic for master, never thought that one day the science and technology of modern Archeology would refute their stories in Egypt and Palestine.

After all, ancient Arabia was behind them nearly forgotten and ancient Egypt had become history. With no body speaking neither ancient Egyptian nor ancient Hebrew the Jewish illuminati thought they had committed the perfect crime

It never crossed the Jewish clergy/scribes’ mind that two thousand years later, a Jewish archeologist was going to be the one to invalidate and expose their fake story of the Israelites’ Exodus from Egypt and their Promised Land in Palestine.

From Ha’aretz Magazine, Friday, October 29, 1999)
“Following 70 years of intensive excavations in the Land of Israel, archaeologists have found out: The patriarchs’ acts are legendary stories, we did not sojourn in Egypt or make an exodus, we did not conquer the land. Neither is there any mention of the empire of David and Solomon. Those who take an interest have known these facts for years, but Israel is a stubborn people and doesn’t want to hear about it”
Prof. Ze’ev Herzog, head of the Department of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Studies at Tel Aviv University.

Why Egypt never converted to Judaism
Now for the exciting part of the Exodus story, the devastating ten plagues. I’m not going to elaborate on the many theories that view the plagues as a mere work of fiction by the Jewish scribes. On the contrary I, for once, will insist that those plagues had really hit the land of the Israelites’ bondage.
But agreeing to the plagues’ premise will come at a heavy price for the Biblical enthusiasts and scholars; the burden of proof (and at the same time disproving my thesis)

The population of the whole of Egypt at the supposed time of the Exodus was around 2.5-3.5 million. If Egypt was the land of bondage that means 2 million people had to leave the country. That would simply translate into a drastic decline, almost catastrophic, in ancient Egypt’s demographic and economic chart. But nothing like that showed in the historical records. As a matter of fact Egypt around 1450 – 1250 BC, suggested time of Exodus, was at the climax of its Imperial glory (the time of king Tut Ankhamun and his unparalleled treasures till this very moment)
Another inevitable result that is usually overlooked is the reaction of the people of Egypt after the plagues. Only fools would expect the aftermath of the ten plagues continued to be business as usual for Egyptians.

Try and imagine yourself amongst ancient Egyptians who had survived the devastation of the ten plagues. You had witnessed firsthand the might of the God of the Israelites as he revealed himself through the plagues (zombie-like rampage during which armies of frogs, lice, flies, hail, locusts were unleashed and the water turned into blood before the whole land finally shrouded in darkness)
Yahweh had forcefully shown to Egyptians the utter impotence of their gods and demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt his power over them. If you were an Egyptian, gawping at those miracles as they unfolded with bloody water dribbling out of your mouth, what would your reaction be?
Humbled by the might and revelation of Yahweh, certainly you would have gotten down on your knees. And with (bloody) tears in your eyes you would have implored Yehwah for forgiveness as you renounced the Egyptian old deities and converted wholeheartedly to Judaism.

If Egypt was the land of the Israelites’ bondage and Exodus, the whole ancient Egyptians would have converted to Judaism around 1400 – 1200 BC (The whole Khazar Kingdom had converted to Judaism for much less a reason)

But that never happened not then nor at any other point in time later on. Egypt never converted to Judaism. The reason for that is very simple and very self-evident; Egypt knew no Phraohs nor any Israelites.

Interestingly, modern Israeli diplomats and high officials will answer any questions from the public or the press except those relating to ancient history or archeology (Rule of thumb for Zionists and Israeli Diplomats). The Zionist elite/illuminati and intelligentsia are quite aware of the Hasmonean and the Septuagint fraud.

Top level Zionists/Israeli heads know that the Zionist project is well and thriving as long as its historical claims are not questioned or challenged.

We could (and actually should) carry on with our very legitimate effort to expose Zionism on the political side. Surely that will hinder the ongoing project of a bigger Israel, but it will not deter or stop the Zionist project. If we want to hit Israel hard where it really hurts, then we must expose the original Jewish lie (the very historical claims the state of Israel has been founded upon)
We should expose the Septuagint fraud. Let’s reveal (make known among the nations) that ancient Egypt never knew Pharaohs nor any Israelites.  In other words we’ll be saying that Egypt was never the land of the Exodus and that Palestine is not the Promised Land (End of the state of Israel)

---

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.Click the link or the photo to buy Dr. Ashraf Ezzat’s new Kindle book  “Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites”

Find out how the Israelites copycatted myths from Assyrian and Babylonian culture, how the Hebrews hijacked and tarnished the ancient Egyptian history and how the Jews are currently grabbing the Palestinian land by historical fraud.  Discover the real and violent history of the Israelites in ancient Arabia and Yemen.

Only by exposing the true history of the Israelites and their Yemenite origin, could we shake the foundations of Zionism and hinder its evil project. Seek the truth; for the truth will set us all free.

---

Download a free Kindle reading app HERE

• About Author
• Latest Posts

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

Dr. Ashraf Ezzat

Ashraf Ezzat, an Egyptian born in Cairo and based in Alexandria. He is graduated from the faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University. Keen not to be entirely consumed by the medical profession, Dr. Ezzat invests a lot of his time in research and writing. History of the ancient Near East and of Ancient Egypt has long been an area of special interest to him.

In his writings, he approaches ancient history not as some tales from the remote times but as a causative factor in our existing life, and to him it's as relevant and vibrant as the current moment. In his research and writings, Dr. Ezzat is always on a quest trying to find out why the ancient wisdom had been obstructed and ancient spirituality diminished whereas the Judeo-Christian teachings and faith took hold and prospered.

Dr. Ezzat has written extensively in Arabic tackling many issues and topics in the field of Egyptology and comparative religion but "Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites" is his first books in English.
He writes regularly at many well-known online websites such as; Veterans Today, Dissident Voice and what really happened.

Dr. Ezzat is also an independent filmmaker. His debut film was back in 2011 "the annals of Egypt Revolution" and in 2012 he made "Tale of Osiris" a short animation for children. In 2013 his short "The Pyramids: story of creation" was screened at many international film festivals in Europe. And he is working now on his first documentary "Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites". Contact Dr. Ashraf Ezzat : amenhotep.55@gmail.com.

Visit his website: https://ashraf62.wordpress.com
Buy Dr. Ezzat's new Kindle book "Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites"

Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

• Authors: Ashraf Ezzat
• Subjects: Religion & Spirituality, Judaism
• Tags: Ancient Egypt, Astonishing Revelations Uncovering, Based Findings Combined, Paradigm Shift
• File Size: 4140 KB
• Print Length: 97 pages
• Publisher: Ashraf Ezzat (March 3, 2015)
• Sold by:  Amazon Digital Services, Inc.
• Language: English
• ASIN: B00U8VK8JE
• Word Wise: Not Enabled
• Lending: Not Enabled

Buy From Amazon.com

FREE Nationwide 2-Day Shipping (Restrictions*)
Big Surprise! Saving up to 45% [ Order Now ]

PDF

Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites PDF

Book Description

For the first time an independent Egyptian researcher and author is digging deep into the history of Ancient Egypt and Israel. Dr. Ashraf Ezzat has embarked on his rare quest with daunting questions and growing doubts about the veracity of the Israelite Exodus
The book’s title is not misleading. The author not only means every word of it but will also substantiate his claim with evidence-based findings. Dr. Ezzat, supported by a serious community of scholars and their amazing findings, will reveal one of the biggest acts of deception in history hidden behind the myth of Egyptian Pharaohs. And yes, the whole story of Egypt ever being ruled by so called Pharaohs is nothing but a pure myth and a blatant deception.
The new evidence-Based Findings Combined with the research carried out by the author of this book will help rid Ancient Egypt of what otherwise seemed like a perpetual curse of Pharaohs. Ancient Egypt was ruled by kings and queens, not Pharaohs. The king of Egypt had five titles none of them was Pharaoh or anything close to it.
Get ready to think the unthinkable and imagine the never thought imaginable, for if Egypt knew no Pharaohs then it goes without saying that Egypt never Knew Moses either. And if Moses never set foot in Egypt, then The Exodus’ road map into the Promised Land has to be redrawn.
Now take a deep breath, and try to digest that the Israelites' Promised Land is not in Palestine where the modern day Israel has been established for nearly six decades now. How is that for a Paradigm Shift, pretty huge eh?
Not only is the author going to stop this far but he is going to hit the readers with more explosive revelations such as neither Abraham nor Joseph ever set foot in Egypt or even dreamed about it.
And if that’s not enough the readers will be in for a stunning surprise when they will find out that the true Pharaoh is not Egyptian and that he actually came from the arid and tribal land of Arabian desert.
And that’s not all, brace yourselves for more Astonishing Revelations Uncovering the Arabic roots of Judaism and where the Jewish Patriarchs Abraham, Joseph and Moses lived and died.
Still the biggest surprises this book will reveal is that Ancient Egypt never witnessed any of the stories of the Jewish patriarchs and that the land of the Nile valley knew neither Pharaohs nor any Israelites.

Ancient Egypt Knew No Pharaohs Nor Any Israelites

25 Votes

  If you think that history is all about the past …  you’d better think again.

If you think the stories the Hebrew Bible had told about ancient Egypt was the whole truth … you’d better think once again.

And if you believe that ancient Egypt was ruled by pharaohs … then you’d better read the next lines

Dr. Ashraf Ezzat

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

King Tutankhamun

Hebrew Bible:Plagiarized Mythology and Defaced Monotheism See: http://ashraf62.wordpress.com/2012/08/19/hebrew-bible-plagiarized-mythology-and-defaced-monotheism/

Hebrew Bible: Plagiarized Mythology and Defaced Monotheism See:http://www.shoah.org.uk/2012/08/27/hebrew-bible-plagiarized-mythology-and-defaced-monotheism/

Ancient Egypt knew no Pharaohs

Prologue

The title might sound a bit strange and perplexing, but throughout the following series of articles I’m going to elaborate on the historical reasons why the rulers of ancient Egypt were called kings and not Pharaohs. It is a research that has taken many years of my life in which I hope to reveal that by straightening out this bizarre issue of pharaoh, the Israelite connection will eventually be exposed.
“Kings or pharaohs, what difference does it make?” some might argue.
Well, it would make a world of difference if we discovered that for thousands of years we’ve been living a myth, another twisted/misinterpreted Jewish tale that we continue to cling to and hold dear as the only irrefutable truth till this very day.
It would make a world of difference if we knew that what took place at that remote period of time in the ancient Near East, particularly in ancient Egypt and the Arab Peninsula has dramatically shaped, over the centuries and through our willful ignorance, the way we live today with all this web of political, ethnic and religious conflict and intolerance.  It is only by unraveling the truth and exposing the myths of that past could we untangle this web of antagonism and belligerence we currently endure. Separating the truth from the myth is what we hope to achieve.

Ancient Egypt, the rise and demise

Egypt, a nation mistakenly known worldwide as the land of the pharaohs, is so embedded in history you can trace back its culture, spirituality and traditions for thousands of years way long before the world crossed the threshold of civilization; when ancient Egypt was building the great pyramids under a powerful, highly organized central government the world was still crawling out of its prehistoric ages
The thing that makes the ancient Egyptian kingdom stand out as a unique civilization in the ancient world history, besides the magnificent legacy of colossal wonders and engineering and the highly spiritual texts and moral teachings is the fact that the ancient Egyptians kept a solid and coherent documentation of their chronicles that covered the geo-political, socio-economic, military records and even covered the daily life activities in a way that left not much room for second guessing or speculation.

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

Civilization long shrouded in silence – David Roberts 1838

With the demise of ancient Egypt, the language of that civilization – hieroglyphs– that kept intact and thriving for well over three millennia was eventually declared extinct following the Ptolemaic and Roman period(332 BC- 395 AD)
After that, the ancient Egyptian monuments and texts had been shrouded in sheer silence and neglect.  The great civilization that had once witnessed the first dawn of human conscience and helped to shape the human code of moral conduct turned into oblivion.
For the following 1500 years too many narratives and stories had been spawned seemingly trying to retell the story of ancient Egypt, not as it actually occurred but through interpretations and manipulations that somehow served the interests of the story tellers.

The story of ancient Egypt, the Israelite version

Of all the narratives that were told about ancient Egypt, the Hebrew Bible is the one narrative that managed to convince/deceive the world with its stories of some Pharaoh and Hebrew slaves that, it alone, monopolized the truth about the history of ancient Egypt.
Most of the scholars of the history of the ancient Near East for nearly two millennia relied primarily on the Bible as a scientific reference. And in doing so they simply followed what the Hebrew scribes wrote, or better yet tampered with in the history of ancient Egypt and blindly took it for granted.
As for the common people, who were illiterate, they fell prey to the rabbinic oral literature of Midrash and Mishnah that ceaselessly boasted about the infamous myth of Moses and pharaoh.
According to the book of Exodus, the king who ruled Egypt in Moses’ time was referred to as Pharaoh. He is addressed as Pharaoh 128 times. e.g:

When Pharaoh heard of this, he tried to kill Moses, but Moses fled from Pharaoh and went to live in Midian… [2:15]
Then the Lord said to Moses, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet.” [7:1]
When Pharaoh’s horses, chariots and horsemen went into the sea, the Lord brought the waters of the sea back over them, but the Israelites walked through the sea on dry land. [15:19]

The world began to recognize Egypt, according to the Hebrew’s alleged narrative, as the land where pharaohs brutally reigned and enslaved the ancient Hebrews.  Biblical Egypt was the land that witnessed the alleged devastating ten plagues, the fictional parting of the sea and the exodus of the Israelites.
But if the Israelites were in such a rush to depart from Egypt why and how would they wander in Sinai, part of Egypt and heavily protected by Egyptian military garrisons, for 40 years … funny eh!
Moreover, why does the whole of Egypt, specifically the desert of the Sinai Peninsula, remain archaeologically alien to the Israelites and their whole Exodus story?
So whenever Egypt was mentioned during the last two thousands of years, the word pharaoh would simultaneously pop up in the discourse thus adding more power, albeit deluding, to the Hebrew and Biblical designation of the rulers of ancient Egypt as pharaohs.

Ancient Egypt resurrected

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

Jean-François Champollion

It was not before 1822 when Jean-François Champollion, the French philologist managed to decipher the hieroglyphs in his arduous task and breakthrough of translating the Rosetta stone.
Thanks to this brilliant Champollion, the long muted and almost buried records and chronicles inscribed on stone and written on papyrus scrolls were resurrected and finally brought back to life.
What the predecessors thought of as mute masonry covered with some weird scribbling  and coffins haunted with some kind of eternal curse began to attract eager historians and modern archeologists .  Upon dusting off the ancient artifacts and temple inscriptions modern archeologists, and for the first time, began to listen to the stone and the papyri uttering the truth about the genuine story of ancient Egypt.
In the mid-nineteenth century the genuine version of the history of ancient Egypt and the Near East began to unravel as its true stories were being retold again.
Ironically enough, what the excavated records of ancient Egypt told the modern historians and archeologists was totally different from what the Hebrew narrative said or claimed to have taken place on the land of Egypt.
But what struck historians as a total surprise is the fact that ancient Egyptian records had no mention of any Israelites in Egypt, non-whatsoever, whereas the Hebrew Bible is replete with tales of Egypt. As the more of ancient Egypt texts and inscriptions were unraveled, the remoter from truth the Biblical narrative looked.
Interestingly, and as the historical findings and the non- stop archeological discoveries were in the process of resurrecting the true story of ancient Egypt the Biblical narrative kept on decomposing subjecting some of the dominant Israelite stories, like the exodus, to scientific doubts and second thoughts.
The Exodus story is currently refuted by prominent modern archeologists, many of whom are interestingly Israelis. Egyptologists now view the story of the Israelites’ exodus as a mere myth or as one of the ancient Israelite’s tales that had been somehow politically manipulated by the Hebrew scribes of the Bible.

The ancient  Egyptian royal titulary

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.If we went back in time and tried to find how the word “Pharaoh” claimed that worldwide fame, we would undoubtedly have to stop before the Hebrew landmark story of the exodus from Egypt.
Was pharaoh the name of the Egyptian king, or was it his title or his epithet, that is one thing the Bible had not been clear about. But while such nuance could be appreciated in fictional works, it could never fit satisfactorily into a scientific historical account.
Tracing the etymology and the historicity of that word “Pharaoh” and for an avid reader and researcher of Egyptology who spends almost all of his weekends at the Egyptian museum in Cairo, I stumbled upon the most astonishing discovery.
I haven’t discovered a new royal mummy nor have I found the lost tomb of king Akhenaten, I simply found out, contrary to what everybody believed, that the history and the chronicles of ancient Egypt had no mention of pharaohs.
History shows that ancient Egypt only knew kings and sometimes queens but never pharaohs nor any mention of enslavement of Israelites.  As a matter of fact; slavery was not a common practice in ancient Egypt and it was introduced into the late dynasties of ancient Egypt only after the Persian and the Roman conquest.
The old kingdom (2686-2181 BC) knew kings such as Djoser, Khufu and Teti , the middle kingdom ( 2055-1650 BC) had kings such as Senusret I and Senusret II and the new kingdom ( 1550-1069 BC) witnessed the topnotch kings such as Thutmose III, queen Hatshepsut, Akhenaten, Tutankhamun and Usermaatre Setpenre ( Ramsses II )
Egyptian kings typically had five names, a Personal name (nomen)  which was bestowed upon them at birth and another four names- Horus name, Nebty (“two ladies”) name, Horus of Gold, Throne name (praenomen),that were not given until they took the throne.
The final four names were bestowed upon the king to officially commemorate his transformation from a mortal to a deity. The birth name of the king seems to have remained very prominent in the king’s life. It was the birth name that was primarily used in the cartouche and the name by which the king was most commonly known.

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

King Tutankhamun royal cartouche with his coronation name

The coronation name inside a cartouche was usually accompanied with the title nesu-bity, “King of Upper and Lower Egypt” and the epithet neb tawy, “Lord of the Two Lands”, referring to upper Egypt and delta regions of Egypt.
For example, king Tutankhamun’s throne name was Neb-Kheperu-re, which means “Lord of Manifestations of Re and was customarily accompanied by the epithet “lord of the two lands” followed by the usual benediction “life, prosperity and health”
According to the ancient texts and papyri, high ranking officials like high priests, princes, commanders of the army… etc, addressed the king as the ruler of the crowns, beloved of the gods, lord of the diadems, living forever and forever… but never as Pharaoh.
Not so often kings of ancient Egypt were referred to as the magnificent in earth and heaven, lord of crowns and as “the sun in the sky” and this was the ultimate titulary that reflected the ascension of the king to the realm of deities.
Etymology shows that the word pharaoh is the Greek pronunciation of the compound word “pe-ro” or “pr –aa” which referred to the palace of the king or rather the great house and not necessarily the king himself. It’s a very controversial thesis; we don’t even know who came up with this hypothesis in the first place.
Obviously it was suggested by the early 19^th century Egyptologists whose mindset was soaked up with Biblical narrative. The first generations of archeologists of the ancient Near Eastern history came and starting digging in Egypt and around the Levant  hoping to trace back and corroborate the ancient stories of the Hebrew Bible not seeking to find out the historical truth be that as it may.

The staggering truth, after almost more than two centuries of archeological digging in Egypt and the Levant, is that the geography of the Hebrew Bible cannot and will not fit into the Egyptian nor the Palestinian territories. The case we have here before us is a unique case of lost geography and identity!

Some argue that during the eighteenth dynasty (sixteenth to fourteenth centuries BC) the title pharaoh was employed as a reverential designation of the ruler as is the case in a letter to Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten), who reigned 1353 – 1336 BC, which is addressed to ‘Pharaoh, all life, prosperity, and health!.
But then again, that was not entirely correct, as shown in the letters of Amarna(Tablet correspondence between the Egyptian administration during the reign of king Akhenaten (1350-1334) and its representatives in Canaan and Amurru and also the state of international affairs between Egypt and the major powers of the Middle East, Babylonia, Mitanni and Assyria).
In the letters sent by the kings of Babylon and Assyria Akhentaen is addressed as the king of Egypt whereas in those sent by the Canaanite representatives he is addressed “To the King my lord, my sun, my god, the breath of my life… your slave and dust under your feet. At the feet of the King my lord, my sun, my god, the breath of my life, I bowed down seven times”

The Great House vs. the White House

Like we of today refer to the president of the United States and his inner circle of high officials as the white house, in the ancient world and especially amongst the Asiatic foreigners may be they referred to the mighty king of Egypt and his court of priests and commanders as the great house.
And just as the white house is neither the title nor the name of the president of United States likewise the “pr – aa” was not the name nor the title of the ruler of ancient Egypt.
Never was there a papyrus or an inscription on any wall or pylon of any Egyptian temple that showed the word pharaoh as a reference to the king himself. The name of the king, as the ancient Egyptian traditions decreed, was always enclosed in a royal cartouche.
And if we are to be challenged, like we had frequently been, with allegations of the presence of royal Cartouches encircling the word pr-aa, like may be that incident found in Kalabsha temple (Greco-Roman temple) … we always respond “foul play”
Kalabsha temple has been renovated/tampered with by scribes affiliated with the Greco-Jewish circle of power that was primarily behind the grand scale fraud of relocating the theater of the Exodus from its actual geography to the valley of the Nile in Egypt (this crime that has been growing like a snow ball and rolling from century to century distorting the whole history of the ancient Near East and thereby the whole world is to be exposed in the coming series of articles)

Read “Ancient Egypt knew no pharaohs nor any Israelites – part two”

And finally to get a grasp of the meaning of “pr – aa” and when ancient Egyptians were inclined to use it, we could only discern that in the following lines from a hymn to the god Ra taken out from the ancient coffin texts or what is known as the book of the dead.

“Homage to thee …
o thou lord of brightness
thou who art at the head
of the great house …
prince of night and of thick darkness …
he comes to thee being a pure soul …
..o, grant thou unto him
His mouth that he may speak therewith,
At the season when there are clouds
And darkness …
Verses from the ancient Egyptian coffin texts
Some of the comments:
paulsays:

March 20, 2012 at 7:19 am

it does not penetrate your thick skull that there was not Mosses, not jewish slaves in Egypt and all current ‘history” is crap invented by ASKE – NAZI crimi8nals just like lies about alleged holocaust.Aske _- nazis murderers killed more than 10 millions Ukrainians by starving them more than 80 million Russians and started all wars and revolutions in the past 700 yearsand continue to this day
Mikkisays:

August 7, 2014 at 6:16 pm

Not so fast, Israelites were in Egypt and their Egyptian name is Shasu – Hicksos – Shepherd Kings.
There is a stela that describes their exodus.
Pharaoh means Phr a Hebrew for Bull.
So in Hebrew Bible the king of Egypt is a Bull, Apis Bull.- Its the Hebrew meaning for Pharaoh.
Just like Moses – Moshe – Moshta Drawn from water.

Like

Reply

The Shasu are not the same as the Israelites so that is incorrect. Shasu was merely a name for people who traveled by foot, generally herders. This could have included Israelites, but was certainly not exclusive to them. Outside of this, we see no permeation of Jewish custom in Egyptian society. How could this be? I assume you speak of the tempest stela, which also provides no proof of Israelites or slaves. It could be used as bad evidence that the exodus took place in that there appears to be a very bad storm that is blamed on a great god, but outside of this there are no parallels. These connections you make can be easily refuted and as a result are not proof. They are merely poor evidence on which you make major assumptions. They could just as easily be used to give evidence to something else.
nooralhaqiqasays:

July 4, 2011 at 6:41 am

I am having to rethink a lifetime of connection with the history of Egypt. Of course mine was more connection with the common people, the arts, and spirit, the way people lived. I never dreamt I was royalty reincarnated or such. At 14 my favourite ever novel was “The Egyptian” by Mika Waltari.
And when I was a young woman, my idea of a romantic afternoon was being caught in a snowstorm in the Royal Ontario Museum with a date, and of course a picnic. I spent hours immersed in walls of stolen hieroglyphics, IE one from the tomb of Hatshepsut, just thinking of those times so long ago.
I watched the Hollywood pap movies, starved for visuals but never felt I was watching the truth. But then, all my life I had a profound distrust of anything thrust upon people, just a suspicious sort and it has proven me right over the years.
And now this. THank you for your work here. A LOT to think about and absorb. If you do not mind, I would like to post this on my blog because I have a few readers who are interested in the past.
And btw, consider, if the Israelis are so desperate to control media now, as they have attempted regarding Gaza, or WW2, or WW1 or ANYTHING they have wanted to control, (yeah, I am a bit of a revisionist if, by revisionist you mean undoing the lies and putting the truth back up), why not the Bible? They rewrite whatever they can for their plans…. just as they rewrote the book they now uses as a real estate deal with God to take over the area of Palestine.
But I digress… thank you for your work.

salwasays:

May 9, 2014 at 11:30 pm

All quite interesting, Dr. Ezzat. Thx for this thought provoking article & the other I just read in VT.
Yes, quite true. It seems lies are part of their existence. They also commissioned the “Scofield Bible” in the early 20th Century, with many made-up details serving their interests, eventually entering them info the actual Bible.in the ’60’s.
I’m not familiar with the Qur’an, but how do most Muslims react to what you write here considering they base it on Judaic teachings.
Also, no way is the Jewish Bible the most ancient of scriptures, as someone has written below, for the “Bhagavad Gita” of Hinduism, meaning the Song of God, was in existence at least 5000 yrs BC.

Waltersays:

March 19, 2012 at 7:03 pm

You read Waltari? Then you know of the Aten worship.
Some scholars, such as Sigmund Freud, have pointed out the obvious implausibilities on the Moses story and have sugge3sted that “Moses”, an Egyptian word meaning “Prince” may have been another name for the heretic Pharaoh Akhenaten (Amenhotep IV), and the story of the Exodus a highly romanticized telling of his attempted return from exile, with the usual spin so that failure to reclaim his throne is sold to later generations as a symbolic victory.
———————————————————————
The whole point is, the “jews” are exiled ATEN worshippers who “morphed” from being peace-lovers to venomous war-mongers from resentment over being ousted from power in Egypt. Palestine was a PROVINCE of Egypt, so how could anyone “escape” to it and “conquer” it?! They were EXILED to it.
———————————————————————
Moses was “raised” as an Egyptian Prince, because Moses WAS an Egyptian Prince. As a matter of FACT, the “Hebrews” are EGYPTIAN.
The Hebrews, the participants of the fabled Exodus, were EGYPTIAN refugee worshipers of ATEN, the MONOTHEISTIC Egyptian LIGHT God.
After Amenhotep IV aka Akenhaten elevated Aten to THE god of Egypt (THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME)
the priests of Amon and the lesser gods worked to undermine Aten. Upon the death of Pharoh Akenhaten, the “ONE” god, Aten, was
overthrown. The temples and all trace of Aten were pulled down and erased. The followers of Aten were persecuted and harrassed.
After some years of this, the followers of Aten made an “exodus” (a going out) from Egypt, to the COLONIES of Egypt in Palestine.
————————————————————————–
NOTE: It is not called a HOMECOMING or RETURN, as it would have been if the participants were SEMITES originally from Palestine.
They THEMSELVES termed it an EXODUS. [EX out of, from, and HODOS, way]
This is people who WERE Egyptian and LEFT, went OUT OF Egypt.
————————————————————————–
The followers of Aten wandered in the desert for years (40?). They assimilated legends, myths, and People, into their Religion and Tribe.
The first generation of refugees passed on, and their religion morphed from a “loving, peace, LIGHT and enlightened god”
to a vengeful, resentful, scab-picking War god.
THIS is why there is NO Egyptian archeological evidence of a Jewish/Semitic presence OR exodus.
The Exodus consisted of EGYPTIANS leaving Egypt in the face of religious persecution that included the complete erasure of the God of the Exodus, ATEN.
How else could one explain what is clearly written in the Bible itself:
For millenia the Jews(Egyptian Refugees) have WAILED about their abject slavery under “Torturous, Inhumane” conditions in Egypt.
Name ONE other “religion” that has a HOLIDAY celebrating the genocide of the CHILDREN of their opponents?
THAT is what “Passover” is. They are celebrating the deaths of the First Born children of the Egyptians.
More then that, they are celebrating revenge on the Worshipers of Aton for overthrowing their god Aten.
Let us take a little look at the abject, “slaves” in Egypt:
How is it that “impoverished, abject slaves” have lambs to slaughter, flocks and herds?
Exodus c.12 v.21
Exodus c.12 v.32&38
Exodus c.35 v.22-23
How is it that “abject impoverished slaves” have neighbors with GOLD and SILVER and JEWELS to LOAN to these “slaves”
Exodus c.3 v.22
Exodus c.11 v.2
Exodus c.12 v.35-36
The god ATEN was overthrown @ 1240 B.C.
After years of persecution the followers of Aten left Egypt IN AN EX-HODOS @ 1210 B.C.

arturjotaefartur felisbertosays:

February 7, 2014 at 12:43 am

Pharaoh, meaning “Great House”, originally referred to the king’s palace, but during the reign of Thutmose III (ca. 1479–1425 BC) in the New Kingdom, after the foreign rule of the Hyksos during the Second Intermediate Period, became the form of address for a person who was king[5] and the son of the god Ra. “The Egyptian sun god Ra, considered the father of all pharaohs, was said to have created himself from a pyramid-shaped mound of earth before creating all other gods.” (Donald B. Redford, Ph.D., Penn State) [6]
The term pharaoh ultimately was derived from a compound word represented as pr-ꜥ3, written with the two biliteral hieroglyphs pr “house” and ꜥꜣ “column”. It was used only in larger phrases such as smr pr-aa ‘Courtier of the High House’, with specific reference to the buildings of the court or palace.[7] From the twelfth dynasty onward the word appears in a wish formula ‘Great House, may it live, prosper, and be in health’, but again only with reference to the royal palace and not the person.
The earliest instance where pr-aa is used specifically to address the ruler is in a letter to Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten), who reigned c. 1353–1336 BCE, which is addressed to ‘Pharaoh, all life, prosperity, and health!.[8] During the eighteenth dynasty (sixteenth to fourteenth centuries BCE) the title pharaoh was employed as a reverential designation of the ruler. About the late twenty-first dynasty (tenth century BCE), however, instead of being used alone as before, it began to be added to the other titles before the ruler’s name, and from the twenty-fifth dynasty (eighth to seventh centuries BCE) it was, at least in ordinary usage, the only epithet prefixed to the royal appellative.[9]
From the nineteenth dynasty onward pr-ꜥꜣ on its own was used as regularly as hm.f, ‘Majesty’. The term therefore evolved from a word specifically referring to a building to a respectful designation for the ruler, particularly by the twenty-second dynasty and twenty-third dynasty.[citation needed]
For instance, the first dated instance of the title pharaoh being attached to a ruler’s name occurs in Year 17 of Siamun on a fragment from the Karnak Priestly Annals. Here, an induction of an individual to the Amun priesthood is dated specifically to the reign of Pharaoh Siamun. This new practice was continued under his successor Psusennes II and the twenty-first dynasty kings. Meanwhile the old custom of referring to the sovereign simply as pr-aa continued in traditional Egyptian narratives.[citation needed]
By this time, the Late Egyptian word is reconstructed to have been pronounced *par-ʕoʔ whence comes Ancient Greek φαραώ pharaō and then Late Latin pharaō. From the latter, English obtained the word “Pharaoh”. Over time, *par-ʕoʔ evolved into Sahidic Coptic prro ⲡⲣ̅ⲣⲟ and then rro (by mistaking p- as the definite article prefix “the” from Ancient Egyptian pꜣ).[10]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharaoh
Jimsays:

March 19, 2012 at 8:28 pm

The Maori of New Zealand tell a different story.
They say they originally were from Assyria
They say they had to leave Assyria
because of famine.
They went to Egypt where they hired onto construction
projects. They were known as great builders.
After a time they tired of Egypt.
They had a great leader named Mohi.
After several plagues which the Egyptians associated
with them, they returned to Assyria.
They overpopulated their old homeland in Assyria
They went north through the land of the
and Scythians then west
The Maori claim to be Brown Maoris.
They claim that white Maoris constantly harassed
them on their way west and would
not let them settle.
—
Maori Symbolism(1926) by Etta Rout

Liamsays:

March 20, 2012 at 1:09 am

you really need to check out the work of alan wilson and baram blackett as well as the history of the stone of destiny…the ten tribes included the Welsh/Cymru people who trace their lineage back to solomon and back even before him to moses…also, the stone of destiny, from the strata of Bethel somehow made its way to Tara then to Westminster Abbey before being stolen in the 50s by Scottish nationalists
history is much more complex and palpable than you portray it here. btw, i have only mentioned a small sampling of the evidence suggesting the true Israelites were in Wales until outsiders usurped the kingdom around 1300
also, any archaeological dates relating to egypt are completely made up because of fudge factors added into the carbon dating formulas…veilikovsky should be a good resource as wells as wilson and blackett
SHAWNsays:

October 22, 2012 at 2:40 pm

THE FAKE JEWS CREATED THE MASONS AND ALL SECRET SOCIETIES NOT CREATED BY THE MONEYCHANGERS WERE TAKEN OVER BY 1717 AND ALL NEW ONES WERE CREATED BY THEM. THIS ISN’T BASHING. THIS IS SAYING, “THE TORA” IS HEBREWISM. A DEAD RELIGION. THE NEW TALMUD RELIGION CALLED JUDAISM IS A REACTIONARY RELIGION TO CHRISTIANITY. CHRISTIANITY IS OLDER THAN JUDAISM.
Paul Mooresays:

May 7, 2013 at 4:25 pm

For years, the popular media has mocked the biblical accounts of Joseph, Moses, the Passover, and the Exodus as being completely incompatible with standard Egyptian chronology. Year after year, we have been told by numerous scholars that events recorded in the books of Genesis and Exodus are nice legends devoid of any historical or archaeological merit.
However, a new wind is blowing. An emerging pool of scholars, representing diverse backgrounds, has been openly calling for a drastic reduction in Egyptian chronology. Such a reduction would serve to line up the historical and archaeological records of Egypt and the Old Testament. Surprisingly, there is a substantial amount of evidence to warrant a significant reduction of Egyptian history. And by doing so, the reliability of Genesis, Exodus, and the entire Old Testament will have to be reconsidered as a viable source of historical truth.
Advocates of chronological revision
Those who advocate a revision of orthodox Egyptian chronology are admittedly in the minority, but their credentials and scholarship are highly esteemed. David Rohl, author of Test of Time, suggests ‘Ramses II should be dated to the tenth century BC—some three hundred and fifty years later than the date which had been assigned him in the orthodox chronology.’1 Peter James and four other scholars published the book Centuries of Darkness.2 They claim that the dates of Egyptian dynasties need to be reduced by hundreds of years, specifically Dynasties 21–24. Dr Colin Renfrew, professor of archaeology at Cambridge University, wrote a foreword to this book:
This disquieting book draws attention … to a crucial period in world history, and to the very shaky nature of the dating, the whole chronological framework, upon which our current interpretations rest…the existing chronologies for that crucial phase in human history are in error by several centuries, and that, in consequence, history will have to be rewritten.3
Sir Alan Gardiner, an authority on Egyptian history, admits to the inherent problems surrounding Egyptian chronology:
Even when full use has been made of the king lists and of such subsidiary sources as have survived, the indispensable dynastic framework of Egyptian history shows lamentable gaps and many a doubtful attribution …What is proudly advertised as Egyptian history is merely a collection of rags and tatters.4
Last year, David Down (who also wrote the very relevant item ‘False History—out with David and Solomon’) and Dr John Ashton wrote Unwrapping the Pharaohs: How Egyptian Archaeology Confirms the Biblical Timeline. Down has performed archaeological research in Egypt, Israel, and the Middle East for nearly half a century. In their book, they propose a revised chronology that harmonizes Egyptian and Old Testament history.
Reasons for questioning the traditional Egyptian timeline
Astronomical assumptions
An emerging pool of scholars, representing diverse backgrounds, has been openly calling for a drastic reduction in Egyptian chronology.
Supposedly, lunar and solar eclipses have been discovered to perfectly match the established dates of Egyptian chronology. This is simply untrue. The concept of astronomical fixation is not based on celestial eclipses but on the ‘Sothic Cycle’. However, the Sothic Cycle is mentioned nowhere in Egyptian texts.5 There are references to ‘the rising of Sothis’ which has been assumed to have been the sighting of the bright star Sirius. The real issue is that many modern scholars theorize that the ancient Egyptians were slightly off in their calendar keeping, and when corrected in light of modern science, the dates line up accordingly. Yet the Egyptians were able to orient their pyramids to within a fraction of a degree to the north, south, east, and west. It is more likely that the Egyptians were meticulous timekeepers. Thus, in Centuries of Darkness, James and his four fellow scholars write, ‘…There are good reasons for rejecting the whole concept of Sothic dating as it was applied by the earlier Egyptologists.’ (See also our Journal of Creation article, Fall of the Sothic theory: Egyptian chronology revisited.)
Manetho’s maze
Another reason for questioning the traditional timeline is Manetho, an Egyptian priest who wrote a history of Egypt in the third century BC. Many consider Manetho’s writings to be indisputable fact. He was skilled at deciphering the hieroglyphs and had access to inscriptions, documents, and other valuable artifacts. However, two problems emerge. First, Manetho was writing hundreds, even thousands of years after many of the actual events. Second, none of Manetho’s writings exist.6 The only source we have for Manetho’s writings are some of his statements that have been quoted by much later historians such as Josephus, Africanus, Eusebius, and Syncellus.
Historical sources for Egyptian chronology
The Egyptian evidence consists of numerous inscriptions, texts, papyrus documents, and artifacts. Although it is very helpful, this evidence provides an incomplete picture of Egyptian history.
The ancient writings of Herodotus, Manetho, Josephus, Africanus and Eusebius provide added historical insight. Herodotus, the famous Greek historian, traveled to Egypt in the 5th century BC and interviewed priests and other knowledgeable individuals. Manetho, as stated above, composed a history of Egypt for the library at Alexandria in the 3rd century BC. Josephus, the famous Jewish historian, quoted from Manetho when writing his historical anthologies in the first-century AD. Africanus and Bishop Eusebius, renowned historians writing in the third and fourth centuries AD respectively, also quoted Manetho and wrote about Egyptian history. However, all of these highly esteemed historians often disagree with one another in the calculation of Egyptian chronology.
Because of the discordant nature of Egyptian chronology, it is impossible to present a comprehensive list of dates, pharaohs, and dynasties. Sir Alan Gardiner wrote, ‘Our materials for the reconstruction of a coherent picture are hopelessly inadequate.’ As a result, we must cross reference the Egyptian accounts with other accurate historical sources. Biblical and Assyrian chronology offer highly consistent dates that can be utilized to rectify many of the ambiguities of Egyptian history. In other words, if Old Testament and Assyrian historical records significantly overlap, then a revision of Egyptian chronology would be perfectly logical in order to harmonize with two independent reliable sources.
Noah’s link to Egypt
The Hebrew name for one of Noah’s grandsons is Mizraim (Genesis 10:6). It is no coincidence that modern Egyptians call themselves Misr, which is a derivative of Mizraim. According to the Book of Genesis, Noah’s grandson, Mizraim,7 is the father of the Egyptians. In a revised chronology, Egypt comes into existence soon after the dispersion from Babel, around 2100 BC. Eusebius, the famous 4th century AD historian, writes:
Egypt is called Mestraim by the Hebrews; and Mestraim lived not long after the flood. For after the flood, Cham (or Ham), son of Noah, begat Aeguptos or Mestraim, who was the first to set out to establish himself in Egypt, at the time when the tribes began to disperse this way and that…Mestraim was indeed the founder of the Egyptian race; and from him the first Egyptian Dynasty must be held to spring.8
In the traditional chronology, a pre-dynastic period of approximately 2,000 years precedes the first Egyptian dynasty. Genesis establishes a much shorter period of time. In addition, the 1988–1989 annual report of the Oriental Institute of Chicago published a summary of extensive archaeological research by Bruce Williams. Williams re-examined discoveries related to the pre-dynastic period and concluded:
Both articles are part of an expanding body of evidence that links the period once known as ‘predynastic’ so firmly to the ages of the pyramids and later, that the term should be abandoned.9
Williams has published several articles in archaeology journals, and his modern research appears to confirm the Genesis account.
Abraham visits Egypt
The biblical date for the Exodus is approximately 1445 BC. Exodus 6:4 and Galatians 3:16–17 tell us that the Lord made a covenant with Abraham 430 years earlier, around 1875 BC. Not long after this date, Abraham traveled to Egypt to escape a severe famine in the land of Canaan (Genesis 12:10). Abraham’s visit did not go unnoticed, as Pharaoh’s officials reported to their king that Abraham’s wife, Sarah, was extremely beautiful. Out of fear, Abraham told Pharaoh that Sarah was his sister. As a result, Pharaoh temporarily inducted Sarah into his harem and paid Abraham many expensive gifts. However, the Lord struck Pharaoh’s house with plagues causing him to release her upon discovering that she was actually Abraham’s wife.
Abraham came from Ur of the Chaldees (Genesis 11:31). From 1922 to 1934, Sir Leonard Woolley discovered it to be the first civilization10 with a superior knowledge of astronomy and arithmetic. In addition, the Sumerian civilization invented writing, composed dictionaries, and calculated square and cube roots.11 Woolley’s discoveries appear to corroborate the writings of Josephus concerning Abraham’s visit to Egypt Josephus writes about Abraham:
He communicated to them arithmetic, and delivered to them the science of astronomy; for before Abram came into Egypt they were unacquainted with those parts of learning; for that science came from the Chaldeans into Egypt.12
In a revised chronology, Abraham would have visited Egypt when Khufu (aka Cheops) was Pharaoh. Before Khufu, the early Egyptian pyramids were fantastic architectural structures, but they were not perfectly square or exactly oriented to all four points on a compass. However, when Khufu built his masterful pyramid, there appears to have been an explosion of astronomical and mathematical expertise. Khufu’s pyramid was perfectly square, level, and orientated to the four points of the compass.
When placed in the proper dynasty, Abraham’s visit to Egypt may have been the catalyst that sparked an architectural revolution in Egyptian history.
Joseph rises to power in Egypt
Dynasty 12 was one of the high points in Egyptian history. By a revised chronology, Joseph would have risen to power under Sesostris I during this dynasty. According to Genesis, Joseph was one of Jacob’s twelve sons. Out of jealousy, Joseph’s brothers sold him to Midianite traders and these traders sold Joseph to an Egyptian officer named Potiphar. Eventually, through a period of trials and tribulations, the Lord enabled Joseph to rule over Egypt, second only to Pharaoh himself.
Sesostris I is known to have had a vizier, or prime minister, named Mentuhotep who possessed extraordinary power Egyptologist, Emille Brugsch, writes in his book Egypt Under the Pharaohs, ‘In a word, our Mentuhotep…appears as the alter ego of the king. When he arrived, the great personages bowed down before him at the outer door of the royal palace.’13 Brugsch’s description appears to corroborate Joseph’s status in Genesis 41:43, ‘He (Pharaoh) had him ride in the second chariot which he had; and they cried out before him, ‘Bow the knee’: and he made him ruler over all the land of Egypt.’
Joseph’s ultimate claim to fame was his ability to interpret dreams. The Egyptians attached significant importance to dreams. Joseph was able to interpret Pharaoh’s perplexing dreams to mean that seven years of plenty would be followed by seven years of the most severe famine. Convinced by Joseph’s interpretation, Pharaoh appointed Joseph to supervise the gathering of grain during the seven years of plenty.
Two clues from Egyptian inscriptions appear to confirm the Genesis account. First, a large relief on ‘Hungry Rock’ states, ‘…Because Hapy [the river god] had failed to come in time in a period of seven years. Grain was scant, kernels were dried up, scarce was every kind of food…’14
Second, a tomb belonging to Ameni, a provincial governor under Sesostris I, says:
No one was unhappy in my days, not even in the years of famine, for I had tilled all the fields of the Nome of Mah…thus I prolonged the life of its inhabitants and preserved the food which it produced.12
Hebrew slaves in Egypt
In the traditional chronology, the Egyptian oppression of Hebrew slaves would have occurred in the 18th dynasty. The problem is there is little to no historical evidence of Hebrew slaves in Egypt at this time. However, when placed in the 12th dynasty under a revised chronology, there is substantial evidence for Israelite slave laborers in Egypt.
Dr Rosalie David, in charge of the Egyptian department of the Manchester Museum, writes about Semitic slavery in Kahun during the second half of the 12th dynasty:
It is apparent that the Asiatics were present in the town in some numbers, and this may have reflected the situation elsewhere in Egypt. It can be stated that these people were loosely classed by Egyptians as ‘Asiatics’, although their exact homeland in Syria or Palestine cannot be determined … The reason for their presence in Egypt remains unclear.15
The Bible makes it quite clear why the Israelite slaves resided in Egypt:
Now there arose a new king over Egypt who did not know Joseph, and he said to his people, ‘Look, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we’…Therefore they set taskmasters over them to afflict them with their burdens…And they made their lives bitter with hard bondage… (Exodus 1:8-14).
Dr Rosalie David also writes about the slave presence at Gurob, Egypt:
The scattered documentation gives no clear answer as to how or why the Asiatics came to Egypt in the Middle Kingdom…There is nevertheless firm literary evidence that Asiatic slaves, women and children were at Gurob.16
Another piece of circumstantial evidence that supports the biblical account is the existence of pyramids built with mud bricks and straw during this dynasty. Amenemhet III, a pharaoh whose statues are sour-faced and cruel-looking in appearance, was likely the Pharaoh who answered the complaining Hebrew supervisors, ‘You shall no longer give the people straw to make brick as before Let them go and gather straw for themselves (Exodus 5:7).’
Another tantalizing piece of circumstantial evidence was the discovery of boxes beneath the floors of houses excavated in Kahun. Sir Flinders Petrie excavated a number of these boxes which contained the skeletons of babies up to three months old, sometimes up to three in a box.17 It is plausible that these baby skeletons are the bones of Hebrew babies killed by Pharaoh’s direct orders in an attempt to limit their population (Exodus 1:16). However, one particular baby boy would escape Pharaoh’s death sentence and change the course of Hebrew history.
Moses is born
According to the Book of Exodus, the baby Moses was adopted by Pharaoh’s daughter while she was bathing at the river. His parents defied Pharaoh’s order and left his destiny in the Lord’s hands, placing him in a basket to be discovered by Pharaoh’s daughter. Many consider this to be a nice story, but completely unrealistic. After all, what Egyptian princess would adopt a Hebrew slave child and offer to make him the next Pharaoh?
However, if you place Moses in the 12th dynasty, the family history of the Pharaonic court appears to line up.18 Amenemhet III had two daughters, but no sons have been positively identified. Amenemhet IV has been proposed as the son of Amenemhet III, but he could just as easily have been the son of Sobekneferu, one of the daughters of Amenemhet III. Amenemhet IV is a very mysterious figure in Egyptian history and may have been a co-regent of Amenemhet or Sobekneferu.
Josephus wrote concerning Pharaoh’s daughter, ‘Having no child of her own…she thought to make him her father’s successor.’ In addition, Dr Donovan Courville has proposed Sobekneferu as the foster mother of Moses. It is plausible since there is no historical record of Sobekneferu having a biological son. If Sobekneferu was the foster mother of Moses, then the biblical account of her bathing by the riverside would make sense. The river god Hapy was the fertility god of Egypt, and Sobekneferu would have likely been observing a religious ritual in the river. Perhaps the appearance of a baby floating in the river would have been interpreted as a direct answer to her prayer for a child.
Exodus from Egypt
In a revised chronology, Neferhotep I was likely the Pharaoh of the Exodus in the 13th dynasty. Exodus 7:10 tells us that Moses and Aaron confronted Pharaoh ‘… and Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh and before his servants, and it became a serpent.’ Pharaoh was not impressed ‘… so the magicians of Egypt, they also did in like manner with their enchantments. For every man threw down his rod, and they became serpents (Exodus 7:11–12).’ In the Liverpool Museum there is a magician’s rod that hails from this same period in Egyptian history.19 The rod is in the form of a long cobra Perhaps the magicians practiced some form of hypnotic power that transformed the cobra rods into the appearance of real snakes, or applied sleight of hand to substitute a real cobra for the rod.
The ten plagues are probably one of the most famous aspects of the Exodus story. If the plagues were historical events as recorded by Moses, then there should be some fragment of evidence describing their catastrophic consequences. In fact, there is a papyrus in the Leiden Museum in Holland which provides a graphic portrayal eerily reminiscent of the biblical account. There is no consensus among archaeologists as to when it was originally penned An excerpt reads:
… Plague stalks through the land and blood is everywhere … Nay, but the river is blood. Does a man drink from it? As a human he rejects it. He thirsts for water … Nay, but gates, columns and walls are consumed with fire…Nay but the son of the high-born man is no longer to be recognized … The stranger people from outside are come into Egypt … Nay, but corn has perished everywhere…Everyone says ‘there is no more.’20
(See also The ten plagues of Egypt: miracles or ‘Mother Nature’?, which also thoroughly refutes the popular ‘algal bloom’ theory).
The final plague cut Pharaoh to the heart. The Lord struck down all the firstborn in each Egyptian family at midnight. The Hebrews were warned of this horrific disaster and Moses ordered them to kill a lamb and splash its blood on their doorposts. The Destroyer would pass over every home with the blood of the lamb. It is quite significant that Neferhotep’s son, Wahneferhotep, did not succeed his father on the throne. Instead, Neferhotep I was succeeded by his brother Sobkhotpe IV ‘who occupied the throne which his brother had recently vacated.’21 To this day, historians are unable to pinpoint the reason why the son of Neferhotep I did not succeed him. Perhaps a closer look at the biblical account is necessary.
Another piece of very interesting circumstantial evidence is the sudden departure of Kahun’s inhabitants. Dr Rosalie David writes:
It is evident that the completion of the king’s pyramid was not the reason why Kahun’s inhabitants eventually deserted the town, abandoning their tools and other possessions in the shops and houses …The quantity, range, and type of articles of everyday use which were left behind in the houses may suggest that the departure was sudden and unpremeditated.22
The evidence appears to confirm Exodus 12:33 which states, ‘And the Egyptians urged the people, that they might send them out of the land in haste…’
But what happened to the mighty Egyptian army? According to the Bible, Pharaoh pursued the fleeing Israelites with his army as they miraculously crossed the Red Sea. However, the Egyptian army ended up at the bottom of the Red Sea (Exodus 14:28). It is no coincidence that the mummy of Neferhotep I has never been found.
The Hyksos mystery solved
Also, archaeologists and other scholars have long puzzled over the rapid occupation of Egypt by the mysterious Hyksos without a military confrontation. Those scholars advocating a revised chronology have identified the Hyksos with the Amalekites, who attacked the Israelites fleeing from Egypt. It is plausible that the Amalekites flowed into Egypt without resistance because of God’s decimation of the Egyptian army under the Red Sea.
… when placed at the proper time, there is an abundance of historical and archaeological evidence to confirm the books of Genesis and Exodus.
The identification of the Hyksos with the Amelekites would explain the otherwise strange passage ‘Amalek was the first of the nations’ (Numbers 24:20), and why an Egyptian would be ‘servant to an Amalekite’ (1 Samuel 30:13). This makes sense in the revised chronology where the Amalikites ruled the mighty Egyptian empire.
Their current obscurity fulfils God’s prophecy to Moses, ‘I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven’ (Exodus 17:14). Thus hardly anyone today has even heard of them, let alone their former pre-eminence The physical extermination (see also Was this a war crime?) was first fulfilled in the time of Saul, but he disobeyed God (1 Samuel 15), so the Amalekites still caused mayhem in David’s time so he practically finished the job (1 Samuel 30).
Conclusion
There is a story of an older, well-respected archaeologist digging next to a young archaeologist at Gezer, Israel.23 The young archaeologist was mocking the historical reliability of the Bible when the older archaeologist quietly responded, ‘Well, if I were you, I wouldn’t rubbish the Bible.’ When the young archaeologist asked ‘Why?’ he replied, ‘Well, it just has a habit of proving to be right after all.’
At this time of year, Christians will be bombarded with shows and magazine articles that portray the biblical accounts of Joseph, Hebrew slavery, Moses, and the Exodus as legend and myth As we have seen, however, when placed at the proper time, there is an abundance of historical and archaeological evidence to confirm the books of Genesis and Exodus.
Synchronizing the biblical timeline with a revised Egyptian chronology will require more testing, research, hard work, and careful scholarship Presupposing biblical accuracy and applying professional research standards, a number of scholars are off to a promising start Dr Clifford Wilson, former Director of the Australian Institute of Archaeology, said it best:
I know of no finding in archaeology that’s properly confirmed which is in opposition to the scriptures. The Bible is the most accurate history textbook the world has ever seen.24
Related Articles
Logistics of the Exodus
How did they build the Great Pyramid?—an architect’s proposal
References
1. Rohl, David A Test of Time: The Bible: from Myth to History, p. 128, Century Limited, London, UK, 1995; see also review by John Osgood, Journal of Creation 11(1):33–35, 1997. Return to text.
2. James, Peter Centuries of Darkness, pp. XV–XVI, Pimlico, London, UK, 1992. Return to text.
3. James, ref. 2, p. 39. Return to text.
4. Gardiner, Allan Egypt of the Pharaohs, p. 53, Oxford University Press, London, UK, 1964. Return to text.
5. Ashton, J. and Down, D Unwrapping the Pharaohs: How Egyptian Archaeology Confirms The Biblical Timeline, p. 74, Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2006. Return to text.
6. Ashton and Down, ref. 5, p. 73. Return to text.
7. Hebrew מצרים (mitsrayim) John Gill’s commentary, available in the Online Bible, states, ‘The word is of the dual number, and serves to express Egypt by, which was divided into two parts, lower and upper Egypt.’ Return to text.
8. Waddell, History of Egypt and Other Works by Manetho: The Aegyptiaca of Manetho, pp. 8–9. Return to text.
9. Sumner, William ‘Scholarship Individual Research,’ The Oriental Institute Annual Report 1988–1989, p. 62, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, 1990. Return to text.
10. Obviously, it was not the first civilization, but the first ‘re-civilization’—after the Flood. Return to text.
11. Ashton and Down, ref. 5, p. 201. Return to text.
12. Whiston, W., Josephus’ Complete Works, Antiquities of the Jews, Book I, chapter VIII, para. 2. Return to text.
13. Breasted, James A History of Egypt, p. 162, Scribner and Sons, New York, NY, 1954. Return to text.
14. Ashton and Down, ref. 5, p. 84. Return to text.
15. David, R The Pyramid Builders of Ancient Egypt: A Modern Investigation of Pharaoh’s Workforce, p. 191, Guild Publishing, London, UK, 1986. Return to text.
16. David, ref. 15, p. 192. Return to text.
17. Ashton and Down, ref. 5, p. 100. Return to text.
18. Ashton and Down, ref. 5, p. 93. Return to text.
19. Ashton and Down, ref. 5, p. 98. Return to text.
20. Velikovsky, Immanuel, Ages in Chaos, Vol.1, ‘From the Exodus to King Akhnaton’, pp. 25–28, Abacus, London, UK, 1973. Return to text.
21. Edward, C.J. et al., The Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. II, Part I, ‘History of the Middle East and the Aegean Region c. 1800–1380 B.C.’, p. 50, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1980. Return to text.
22. David, ref. 15, p. 195 and 199. Return to text.
23. Wieland, C., Archaeologist confirms creation and the Bible: Interview with archaeologist Clifford Wilson, Creation 14(4):46–50, 1992 Return to text.
24. Wilson, C, Archaeologist Speaks Out, Creation 21(1):15, 1998. Return to text.

1. After reading just about all of the posts that were written here, it is still not hard for me to state with even more fact now that, when one is talking about a premier civilization, that this place (Egypt/Ethiopia) was it…earlier than Sumer, earlier than Babylon, earlier than Assyria. Taking into consideration the information the article written by Daniel Anderson and posted by Paul Moore that time needs to be reduced so that it matches up better with Biblical history, and then taking into consideration the webpage written about Immanuel Velikovsky that the time needs to be increased more than what it actually is so as not to misconstrue the radiocarbon dating mechanics is very daunting, and then you have old Edgar Casey who stated that the monuments are far older that what we really thing that they are…not by hundreds of years, but by thousands! The information that is available is insurmountable, however, it would seem like since there are some people who have come to the conclusion that there were primarily dark complected peoples living in what is now Egypt and Ethiopia (hence the Greek name of it – Land of the Burnt Faces), that it was those people who were primarily responsible for building the monuments that are still standing in those lands today…a fact that they undoubtedly do not want to continue to contend with…and because of such, such peoples have been cursed, deemed unfit or unworthy to have a history that is thoroughly draped in its right light and always have to be portrayed in a negative fashion. Through research and hard work, the information is slowly coming out…and more time is needed to tell the whole story.
   However, concerning the word “Pharoah”…I would have to concur that such a word did not exist in the Egyptian language since the word is of Greek origin and means “Great House” as is stated in many of the comments above. However, someone brought to my attention the work of Jean-François Champollion who was responsible for a lot of the translation of the Rosetta Stone and other hieroglyphics from Ancient Egypt. If he hadn’t gotten around to transcribing the images from many of the royal cartouches until the 1800s, then how do some of the names that he translated such as Ramses, end up appearing in the Bible at all even if it is the name of a place and not a person?
   

   Like

   Reply
2. Pingback: Exodus Buy-bull Journal Part 2 of 3 | The Buy-bull Journal
   
3. An interesting journey into the etymology of “pharaoh”, my only comment would be that Judaism like all other organized religions throughout history (the religion of ancient Egypt being no exception), crafted their own history, their own story of creation and mythology to support the unification and synthesis of their people – this is true for Christianity and Islam as much as it is for the Judaism (Zorastrianism was probably used for similar purposes by the ancient Persians). Questioning the contents of the Old Testament from an historical perspective is akin to questioning the resurrection of Christ or the divine revelations of Mohammed to a certain extent, these are matters of faith. To the Jews, their history, their trials as outlined in the Old Testament, be they historically accurate or not, are what united them and unites them to this day. Usurping these tales for more than what they are – more accurately placed in the realm of myth rather than history – is simply a misinterpretation of the Old Testament and the Torah and should be called out as such. Misinterpreting them today to support political agendas or the legitimacy to property, cities or temples, well that’s either ignorance or mindful manipulation of facts to serve a political or authoritarian objective, take your pick. (Full disclosure I’m Jewish by the way, at least by blood).
   Anyway, interesting post as always and I find myself reaching back into Ancient Egypt after a sojourn into the Ancient Middle, Near and Far East as it would appear that the Egyptians are undoubtedly the oldest civilization in the world and clearly the religions of the Ancient Greeks, Babylonians, Jews and even Persians were influenced to at least some extent by Ancient Egypt.
   Respectfully
   http://www.snowconenyc.com
4. Carriesays:
   August 27, 2014 at 9:14 pm
   Very interesting hypothesis. I also agree that the Hebrews were not in Egypt, but from a different angle. Please allow me to elaborate. The term translated as Egypt from the Hebrew is H4714, which etymologically translates as “double straits.” I do believe this original etymological translation holds some meaning to the landscape of the country and that it has been incorrectly translated for generations (on purpose, as a means of control, which is another discussion altogether). There is only one location that I can think of near the area we call modern day Israel that has a double strait: The Turkish Straits of the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus. These two straits also hold the well known cities of Troy and Istanbul, both with mythic, iconic pasts.
   The kingdom of Hatti, which was only discovered in the early 1900s, was centered in Anatolia. They battled Rameses II at Kadesh and made a peace treaty with Rameses, who married two daughters from the Hatti King’s family. It is the Hatti that are believed to be the Biblical Hittites. Seeing that Homer is believed to be from Smyrna, in the center of Turkey, and that the Hatti language was an Indo-European language, most closely related to Armenian, I am concluding thus far that the Hebrews were slaves in “Egypt” or more correctly, the land of the double straits. We have misplaced Egypt in the Hebrew narrative. It would make sense then that they were in fact in slavery since the culture further north, namely the Grecian city states and yes, later Rome, did have a practice of slavery, as did the Hatti.
   A couple of additional thoughts on the Hatti: one of their main gods was the storm god. After the fall of their empire in 1300-ish BC, they were assimilated into other cultures around them. If you follow the language, however, a good majority had to have ended up in modern day Armenia (since Armenian is the closest modern relation to the Hatti language). Since Mount Ararat is in Turkey, smack in the middle of their area, and they worship the storm god, I must wonder if this are was where the flood occurred. The Armenians trace their lineage back to Japtheth, as do the Khazars, so much of that research sticks in my mind. It also fulfills the prophecy that Japtheth will dwell in the tents of Shem. Those who claim to be “Jews” and who are not.
   Lastly, concerning the term Pharaoh. I want to offer another idea. Time will tell if my hunch is at all correct. Pharaoh, as we know it, was spread all over thru Latin etc and it all goes back to the Hebrew, which supposedly goes back to the Egyptian. What if pharaoh was a Hatti term and not an Egyptian term? I am still researching Armenian to see if there is a correlation to king or perhaps emperor in the translation.
   Good luck on your research and continued search for truth. Peace and blessings!
   

http://ashraf62.wordpress.com/2011/06/18/ancient-egypt-had-no-pharaohs-2/

RELATED ARTICLES:

Hebrew Bible: Plagiarized Mythology and Defaced Monotheism See: http://ashraf62.wordpress.com/2012/08/19/hebrew-bible-plagiarized-mythology-and-defaced-monotheism/

Hebrew Bible: Plagiarized Mythology and Defaced Monotheism See:http://www.shoah.org.uk/2012/08/27/hebrew-bible-plagiarized-mythology-and-defaced-monotheism/

---

The Real Exodus: End of Israel

Posted by Dr. Ashraf Ezzat on April 17, 2015

  “Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites”

“The Hebrew clergy/illuminati, equipped with Talmudic & Pharisaic opportunism and deceit, decided to erase the Israelites’ remote Arabian history and invent a whole new one in Egypt and Palestine”

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

By Dr. Ashraf Ezzat

---

History doesn’t only shape our reality but it is also crucial for our decision making. If our reality was devoid of any past experience, I couldn’t see how we could plan for a better future.
Though history is long-gone, it remains the only thing to learn from, as the future has not yet come into existence.  And if we learned from a false or tampered with history then all our perceptions of reality will be wrong. If we were given/inherited a fake history we would be bound to indefinitely linger in falsehood.

The real history is not necessarily the stories you were told in the school. The real history is the one you will discover yourself. Unless you make the effort and embark on a quest for the truth, you may never know what really happened. The first step on the road to truth is to doubt all the stories you were told happened in the past.

With some critical thinking employed, many of us have come to doubt and question some of the modern stories dished out to us by mainstream politics and media. One blatant example is the official story of 911. We simply can’t buy it, for first and foremost the story doesn’t make sense.
And if we are entitled to question stories as recent as 911 and WW II, who can deny us the same right when dealing with ancient stories.

Defying academia and breaking stereotypes.
Never make the mistake of believing that old stories can not be doubted for they are history now. History might be gone already but could still be seen differently. If old stories are properly investigated they could be revisited /reinterpreted again. For like 911, many old stories just don’t make any sense.

No matter whom you are, and no matter where you are (America, Africa, Australia, etc.), whether you’re a man of faith (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) or not, there are some stories, old stories that have contributed to your reality.  The ancient story of the Israelite Exodus from Egypt is one of those stories.

The story of Pharaoh and Moses is not just any story. It is at the root of the core belief of all Jews, Muslims and Christians. It is the ultimate display of God’s might and his watching over his so called chosen people. It is the ultimate thriller in otherwise, a completely dreary story of the Israelites and their Promised Land.

The story of Pharaoh and Moses is simply a blockbuster. Hollywood never failed to turn the Exodus story into multi-million dollars business. At the same time films about Moses/Pharaoh (from Cecil B. DeMille’s Ten commandments 1923/1956 to Ridley Scott’s Exodus: Gods and Kings 2014) have managed to turn that historically unverified story into an unshakable truth in the minds of generations of gullible and uneducated masses.

The story of Moses/Pharaoh is so mesmerizing it’s often used as a starter (hors-d’oeuvre) when indoctrinating the kids into any of the Abrahamic religions. It is always so much easier to talk the kids into their ancestors’ faith after telling them that ancient and epical story.

Maybe as a grown-up you don’t fully appreciate the powerful impact the story of Pharaoh/Moses had on you. But actually looking back many years ago, it could turn out that this story is one of the main reasons why you are now such a devout Jew /Muslim /Christian.

In case you are not that religious, there is no denying that the same story of Pharaoh and Moses is responsible for many of the stereotypes lurking in the back of your mind. I mean, could you deny that whenever Egypt is mentioned an uncontrollable visual association with Moses’ ruthless Pharaoh is instantly evoked in your mind.

Egypt and Pharaohs have become almost identical and inseparable mental associations. Whenever we are talking about Egypt, then we must be talking about Pharaohs.

And therefore the ousting of the Egyptian President Mubarak, an incident 3500 years away from Exodus, has been seen as the fall of the last Pharaoh (lingering stereotype)

The same stereotype has infiltrated the realm of academia. Egyptology is an established science for studying ancient Egyptian history and civilization. Unfortunately, Archeologists and historians of ancient Egypt are also referring to ancient Egypt as Pharaonic Egypt. The reason for that is not scientific research or any archeological findings rather the Egyptologists’ Bible-geared mindset. (The word Pharaoh has never been found in ancient Egyptian records)

There is a weird Hollywood insistence on pinpointing one of Egypt’s most glorious kings, Ramses II 1279–1213 BC, as the Pharaoh of Moses. But little did Mr. Demille or Mr. Scott know when they made their films that Ramses (Greek name) is not the actual (Egyptian) name of the king they chose to defame. Actually King Ramses II official (coronation) name isUsermaatre Setepenre (does that look anything like Pharaoh?)

With that bias archeologists have embarked on their extensive excavations in Egypt and Palestine. In this way, most archeologists didn’t set out to seek the historical truth, rather to enforce their Biblical narrative on the ancient history of Egypt and Palestine. An obvious example of that predisposition is the archeological work in the first half of the 20^th century by the American school of oriental research in Jerusalem headed by William F. Albright.

Usually religious clerics and academic scholars don’t see eye to eye when it comes to ancient history. The one thing they both agree upon though is that ancient Egypt was ruled by so called Pharaohs and that from Egypt that Moses led the epic Exodus of the Israelites. But guess what? They both are deadly wrong. For Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor any Israelites.

Actually the Hebrew book of tales, also known as the Hebrew Bible, never referred to Egypt as the land of the Exodus. The Story of Pharaoh and Moses according to the Hebrew book happened in a place called ‘Mizraim/Misrim’

Mizraim is an obscure little village in south west of ancient Arabia and Faraon/فرعون (according to classical Arabic historians) was the Arabic title of its chieftain.

Some might wonder what on earth ancient Arabia has to do with Moses and Pharaoh. Actually, it was in ancient Arabia and North Yemen where the Israelites and Judaism really first appeared (Nothing in this world works in the way you think it does; history included)

Judaism is one of ancient Arabia’s cults that had absolutely nothing to do with the Roman Catholic Church or its Christianity. (Linking Judaism to Christianity is the result of a later Roman-Jewish deception) Hence the ‘Old-New Testament / Judeo-Christian’ epithet is nothing but a political setup.   Actually the fraud kicked off by the Jewish-Greek complicity during the translation of the Hebrew book to the Greek language.

Moreover, the Israelites tribe and all their stories (of Abraham/Ibrahim in Arabic, Isaac/Ishaak, Jacob/Yaakob, Joseph/Youssef, and Moses/Moussa) took place in South Arabia and Northern Yemen. (Zionists cannot have a damn claim to modern day Yemen for, as explained in the book, the Yemenite Israelites have long perished)

‘Come now therefore, and I will send thee unto Faraon, that thou mayest bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Mizraim.’ Exodus 3-10
ז  וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה, רָאֹה רָאִיתִי אֶת-עֳנִי עַמִּי אֲשֶׁר בְּמִצְרָיִם; וְאֶת-צַעֲקָתָם שָׁמַעְתִּי מִפְּנֵי נֹגְשָׂיו, כִּי יָדַעְתִּי” אֶתמַכְאֹבָיו.”

In my recent book, Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites, I join a community of high profile scholars in exposing a two-thousand-year conspiracy. (All the evidence-based findings and research are cited in the book)

In the second century BC, the Hebrew Bible was translated to Greek at the legendary library of Alexandria.

Seventy Jewish scribes, hence the designation Septuagint Bible, were assigned this task by the Ptolemies (Greek monarchy of Egypt) in which they cunningly replaced this obscure Mizraim and its Faraon with the mighty Egypt and its king (Rulers of ancient Egypt were called kings and queens and not Pharaohs).

The Greek forged version, with this malicious distortion of ancient history, has been the source for all translations of the Bible worldwide ever since. (The source of even the Bible tucked under your pillow  … heh)

Generations after generations have been fed this fake story of Pharaoh of Egypt and Moses of the Israelites. What added to the drama and made it all the more mesmerizing is the fact that Egypt, with its fame and glory in the ancient world, had been the theatre of the Exodus story.

From tribe to Empire (The real story of Exodus)
May be this never crossed your mind, but If it wasn’t for Egypt and its splendor the Israelite tales wouldn’t have appealed to the masses. They wouldn’t have propagated beyond the confines of the Hebrew book. Try and retell the Exodus story as it had actually occurred in an obscure and small Arabian village called Mizraim.

Tell the story of Moses, the Yemenite Israelite, who was dumped as a newborn infant in one of the river streams of Southern Arabia. Moses was picked up and raised in the household of فرعون/Faraon (not Pharaoh). Being the chieftain of Mizraim, a transit-village for ancient caravan trade, Faraon was a wealthy and powerful man.

As a young boy, Moses herded sheep and when turned into a strong man he helped Faraon attending the caravan’s merchants and their needs. Camel Caravans that had been crossing the arid Arabian desert for weeks – carrying shipments of spices, frankincense, textile and ivory- usually stayed at Mizraim for a couple of days for rest and resupply of water and food.

That’s why Mizraim as a transit-village had to have as many storehouses as possible. Whenever a caravan stopped at Mizraim, the valuable cargo/commodities carried by the camels would be unloaded and stored in the storehouses.

In that way Mizraim served as a store city and as the business of Faroan prospered he always needed more storecities/storhouses (that’s what the Israelite slaves toiled all day building for Faraon/فرعون) The Israelite slaves were actually forced into building brick stone storehouses (not Pyramids and Temples for crying out loud)

“Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh store-cities” Exodus 1-11

Faraon whose name by the way was Al Waleed bin Musaab, kept a small garrison of guards to protect his lucrative business and safeguard the valuable cargo of the camel trains which cut across ancient Arabia from Yemen in the south to Petra and Egypt in the North.

And since slavery was a pervasive culture/trade in ancient Arabia (ancient Egypt didn’t practice slavery by the way), Faraon had a couple of hundred slaves who worked for him. Ancient Arabia was a tribal culture, and most of the slaves in Mizraim were from the Israelites’ tribe (originally from North Yemen)

Being an Israelite Moses had to defend a fellow Israelite when attacked by a garrison guard. Moses killed the guard. Moses had to explain himself and apologize for Faraon but he didn’t. Instead Moses, accompanied by a couple of hundred of the Israelite slaves fled Mizraim (the Hebrew Bible estimate is 600000 slaves that would approximate to 2 million if children and livestock were included – part of the Septuagint forgery and fraud)

The escape coincided with the break of a mighty storm (some sources say earthquake) which hit Mizraim and the desert all around it.  On hearing the news of the slaves’ escape Faraon and his garrison followed them. While crossing the same river stream Moses had been dumped in before, some of the garrison guards stumbled and fell in the water. Hurdled by the tempest and many wounded guards Faraon called off his pursuit of the Israelite slaves, some say he also drowned. End of story. (If you’re wondering about the ten plagues; we will get to that at the end of this post)

Now, try and take the land of Egypt with its Pyramids, temples, music, riches, costumes, culture, sculpture, priests, military chariots, people and River Nile out of the Exodus Story and then see what you’ve got (not much left for Mr. DeMille or Mr.Scott eh?)

That’s right, you will end up with a totally different story; boring and irrelevant to any audience except may be the sheep herders and tribesmen from ancient Arabia.

Could you see why the Jewish scribes thought it was not a bad idea to relocate the theater of their stories from the obscure and small Mizraim to the land of the Pyramids and the Nile ? From the tribe to the Empire.

Translating the Hebrew Bible to Greek gave the Jewish scribes the golden opportunity to disseminate their tribal stories far and wide. Faking the Exodus story also ensured the whole Levant as the Israelites’ Promised Land instead of a small and obscure piece of the arid Arabian Desert in North Yemen.

Surely the Jewish scribes didn’t blow the opportunity, even if it meant tainting the whole history of ancient Egypt and messing up the history of the whole Ancient World. (Not to mention deceiving generations of credulous believers)

First tide of Jewish migration to Palestine (The perfect crime)
In the second century BC, a very important turn of politics and linguistics was taking place across the Mediterranean and the whole ancient Levant; the Greek rise to power as the new Empire, and the replacement of Hebrew by Aramaic tongue in the Levant and the ancient Egyptian (Demotic) by the new Coptic Greek language in Egypt.

After the decline of the ancient caravan trade (which sustained the Yemenite Hebrews for centuries), new influx of immigrant Jews from Arabia to the Levant (Palestine, Jordan and Lebanon and Syria) started as early as the 3^rd -4^th century BC.  As the new naval route and its new economics was replacing the ancient caravan trade, the Yemenite/Arabian Jews simply followed the money (Ancient Jewish trait).

Since the new trade centers were scattered across the north and east coast of the Mediterranean e.g. Carthage (Tunisia), Alexandria (Egypt) and Tyre (Lebanon), that’s where the new Jewish immigrants headed to.

But the majority settled in Palestine (already inhabited by Phoenicians and the descendants of Peleset/Sea people) Later known as the Palestinians (Distinctly different from the Biblical Philistines – topic for an upcoming post)

Bit by bit, the new generations of immigrant Jews, not the Israelites, to Palestine, in their new settlements and with their new Aramaic tongue began to lose ties with ancient Arabia. Hence, the Jewish clergy/illuminati, from the Hasmonean dynasty 140 BC–37 BC, embarked on a malevolent scheme for establishing a parallel Jewish history in Palestine (a scheme that has recently been revived by the Zionists)

The Hebrew clergy/illuminati, equipped with Talmudic & Pharisaic opportunism and deceit, decided to erase the Israelites’ remote Arabian history and invent a whole new one in Egypt and Palestine (Talmudic laws allow such deceptions and devious Machiavellian conduct)

The gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has exposed their money to Israel, so Jews May Lie to Non-Jews (Baba Kamma 37b) 
 Jews may use lies (“subterfuges”) to circumvent a Gentile (Baba Kamma 113a.) … teachings from the Jewish Talmud

The Hebrew scribes had kept the ancient stories, with the bits and pieces about God’s chosen people and the Promised Land, but projected it all over their new settlements in Palestine. Hell, they had even built a new parallel temple (so called second temple that was demolished by the Romans in 70 AD)

New fake Jewish history had been fabricated, while the (Real) oral history and the Israelites remote Arabian memories kept on fading away over the long years. 
But the Jewish Rabbis, Rab/رب is Arabic for master, never thought that one day the science and technology of modern Archeology would refute their stories in Egypt and Palestine.

After all, ancient Arabia was behind them nearly forgotten and ancient Egypt had become history. With no body speaking neither ancient Egyptian nor ancient Hebrew the Jewish illuminati thought they had committed the perfect crime

It never crossed the Jewish clergy/scribes’ mind that two thousand years later, a Jewish archeologist was going to be the one to invalidate and expose their fake story of the Israelites’ Exodus from Egypt and their Promised Land in Palestine.

From Ha’aretz Magazine, Friday, October 29, 1999)
“Following 70 years of intensive excavations in the Land of Israel, archaeologists have found out: The patriarchs’ acts are legendary stories, we did not sojourn in Egypt or make an exodus, we did not conquer the land. Neither is there any mention of the empire of David and Solomon. Those who take an interest have known these facts for years, but Israel is a stubborn people and doesn’t want to hear about it”
Prof. Ze’ev Herzog, head of the Department of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Studies at Tel Aviv University.

Why Egypt never converted to Judaism
Now for the exciting part of the Exodus story, the devastating ten plagues. I’m not going to elaborate on the many theories that view the plagues as a mere work of fiction by the Jewish scribes. On the contrary I, for once, will insist that those plagues had really hit the land of the Israelites’ bondage.
But agreeing to the plagues’ premise will come at a heavy price for the Biblical enthusiasts and scholars; the burden of proof (and at the same time disproving my thesis)

The population of the whole of Egypt at the supposed time of the Exodus was around 2.5-3.5 million. If Egypt was the land of bondage that means 2 million people had to leave the country. That would simply translate into a drastic decline, almost catastrophic, in ancient Egypt’s demographic and economic chart. But nothing like that showed in the historical records. As a matter of fact Egypt around 1450 – 1250 BC, suggested time of Exodus, was at the climax of its Imperial glory (the time of king Tut Ankhamun and his unparalleled treasures till this very moment)
Another inevitable result that is usually overlooked is the reaction of the people of Egypt after the plagues. Only fools would expect the aftermath of the ten plagues continued to be business as usual for Egyptians.

Try and imagine yourself amongst ancient Egyptians who had survived the devastation of the ten plagues. You had witnessed firsthand the might of the God of the Israelites as he revealed himself through the plagues (zombie-like rampage during which armies of frogs, lice, flies, hail, locusts were unleashed and the water turned into blood before the whole land finally shrouded in darkness)
Yahweh had forcefully shown to Egyptians the utter impotence of their gods and demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt his power over them. If you were an Egyptian, gawping at those miracles as they unfolded with bloody water dribbling out of your mouth, what would your reaction be?
Humbled by the might and revelation of Yahweh, certainly you would have gotten down on your knees. And with (bloody) tears in your eyes you would have implored Yehwah for forgiveness as you renounced the Egyptian old deities and converted wholeheartedly to Judaism.

If Egypt was the land of the Israelites’ bondage and Exodus, the whole ancient Egyptians would have converted to Judaism around 1400 – 1200 BC (The whole Khazar Kingdom had converted to Judaism for much less a reason)

But that never happened not then nor at any other point in time later on. Egypt never converted to Judaism. The reason for that is very simple and very self-evident; Egypt knew no Phraohs nor any Israelites.

Interestingly, modern Israeli diplomats and high officials will answer any questions from the public or the press except those relating to ancient history or archeology (Rule of thumb for Zionists and Israeli Diplomats). The Zionist elite/illuminati and intelligentsia are quite aware of the Hasmonean and the Septuagint fraud.

Top level Zionists/Israeli heads know that the Zionist project is well and thriving as long as its historical claims are not questioned or challenged.

We could (and actually should) carry on with our very legitimate effort to expose Zionism on the political side. Surely that will hinder the ongoing project of a bigger Israel, but it will not deter or stop the Zionist project. If we want to hit Israel hard where it really hurts, then we must expose the original Jewish lie (the very historical claims the state of Israel has been founded upon)
We should expose the Septuagint fraud. Let’s reveal (make known among the nations) that ancient Egypt never knew Pharaohs nor any Israelites.  In other words we’ll be saying that Egypt was never the land of the Exodus and that Palestine is not the Promised Land (End of the state of Israel)

---

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.Click the link or the photo to buy Dr. Ashraf Ezzat’s new Kindle book  “Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites”

Find out how the Israelites copycatted myths from Assyrian and Babylonian culture, how the Hebrews hijacked and tarnished the ancient Egyptian history and how the Jews are currently grabbing the Palestinian land by historical fraud.  Discover the real and violent history of the Israelites in ancient Arabia and Yemen.

Only by exposing the true history of the Israelites and their Yemenite origin, could we shake the foundations of Zionism and hinder its evil project. Seek the truth; for the truth will set us all free.

---

Download a free Kindle reading app HERE

• About Author
• Latest Posts

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

Dr. Ashraf Ezzat

Ashraf Ezzat, an Egyptian born in Cairo and based in Alexandria. He is graduated from the faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University. Keen not to be entirely consumed by the medical profession, Dr. Ezzat invests a lot of his time in research and writing. History of the ancient Near East and of Ancient Egypt has long been an area of special interest to him.

In his writings, he approaches ancient history not as some tales from the remote times but as a causative factor in our existing life, and to him it's as relevant and vibrant as the current moment. In his research and writings, Dr. Ezzat is always on a quest trying to find out why the ancient wisdom had been obstructed and ancient spirituality diminished whereas the Judeo-Christian teachings and faith took hold and prospered.

Dr. Ezzat has written extensively in Arabic tackling many issues and topics in the field of Egyptology and comparative religion but "Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites" is his first books in English.
He writes regularly at many well-known online websites such as; Veterans Today, Dissident Voice and what really happened.

Dr. Ezzat is also an independent filmmaker. His debut film was back in 2011 "the annals of Egypt Revolution" and in 2012 he made "Tale of Osiris" a short animation for children. In 2013 his short "The Pyramids: story of creation" was screened at many international film festivals in Europe. And he is working now on his first documentary "Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites". Contact Dr. Ashraf Ezzat : amenhotep.55@gmail.com.

Visit his website: https://ashraf62.wordpress.com
Buy Dr. Ezzat's new Kindle book "Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites"

Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

• Authors: Ashraf Ezzat
• Subjects: Religion & Spirituality, Judaism
• Tags: Ancient Egypt, Astonishing Revelations Uncovering, Based Findings Combined, Paradigm Shift
• File Size: 4140 KB
• Print Length: 97 pages
• Publisher: Ashraf Ezzat (March 3, 2015)
• Sold by:  Amazon Digital Services, Inc.
• Language: English
• ASIN: B00U8VK8JE
• Word Wise: Not Enabled
• Lending: Not Enabled

Buy From Amazon.com

FREE Nationwide 2-Day Shipping (Restrictions*)
Big Surprise! Saving up to 45% [ Order Now ]

PDF

Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites PDF

Book Description

For the first time an independent Egyptian researcher and author is digging deep into the history of Ancient Egypt and Israel. Dr. Ashraf Ezzat has embarked on his rare quest with daunting questions and growing doubts about the veracity of the Israelite Exodus
The book’s title is not misleading. The author not only means every word of it but will also substantiate his claim with evidence-based findings. Dr. Ezzat, supported by a serious community of scholars and their amazing findings, will reveal one of the biggest acts of deception in history hidden behind the myth of Egyptian Pharaohs. And yes, the whole story of Egypt ever being ruled by so called Pharaohs is nothing but a pure myth and a blatant deception.
The new evidence-Based Findings Combined with the research carried out by the author of this book will help rid Ancient Egypt of what otherwise seemed like a perpetual curse of Pharaohs. Ancient Egypt was ruled by kings and queens, not Pharaohs. The king of Egypt had five titles none of them was Pharaoh or anything close to it.
Get ready to think the unthinkable and imagine the never thought imaginable, for if Egypt knew no Pharaohs then it goes without saying that Egypt never Knew Moses either. And if Moses never set foot in Egypt, then The Exodus’ road map into the Promised Land has to be redrawn.
Now take a deep breath, and try to digest that the Israelites' Promised Land is not in Palestine where the modern day Israel has been established for nearly six decades now. How is that for a Paradigm Shift, pretty huge eh?
Not only is the author going to stop this far but he is going to hit the readers with more explosive revelations such as neither Abraham nor Joseph ever set foot in Egypt or even dreamed about it.
And if that’s not enough the readers will be in for a stunning surprise when they will find out that the true Pharaoh is not Egyptian and that he actually came from the arid and tribal land of Arabian desert.
And that’s not all, brace yourselves for more Astonishing Revelations Uncovering the Arabic roots of Judaism and where the Jewish Patriarchs Abraham, Joseph and Moses lived and died.
Still the biggest surprises this book will reveal is that Ancient Egypt never witnessed any of the stories of the Jewish patriarchs and that the land of the Nile valley knew neither Pharaohs nor any Israelites.

 

1.      adminsays

Examination of an article claiming to legitimise suicide bombings

Because of the escalating use of suicide bombing in Pakistan and Afghanistan, I felt compelled to revisit this topic by reposting the article below, bearing in mind that it does not really tackle many of the key issues such as what a legitimate jihad really is, and whether it is even possible or legal in terms of the shari’ah to fight against absolutely overwhelming odds, particularly when women and children are exposed to danger, the illegitimacy of declaring a jihad if there is no Dar al-Islam, i.e. a social order living by the behaviour pattern of Islam and caring for the poor and the disadvantaged, the illegality of a jihad that does not hoist high the banner of Islam and call the non-Muslims to Islam, etc. Rather I have limited myself to dealing with the anonymous** author’s attempt to prove the legality of killing oneself in this manner.

Examination of an article claiming to legitimise suicide bombings “The Islamic Ruling on The Permissibility of Martyrdom Operations”

by Abdassamad Clarke

In the name of Allah, the All-Merciful, the Most Merciful. May Allah bless our Master Muhammad and his family and companions and grant them peace.

All praise is due to Allah, Sustainer of the Universe, Who informs us that:
“Were it not for Allah’s repelling some people by means of others, the earth would surely have become corrupt.” [Quran]
The choicest peace and blessings be on the Chief of the Prophets, who has said, “By [Allah] in Whose Hand is my soul! I have surely wished to be killed in the path of Allah, then brought to life, then killed [again], then brought to life, then killed!” [Bukhari, Muslim and others]
And who has also said, “Act, and each will be eased to that for which he was created.” [Bukhari, Muslim and others]
Allah legislated Jihad for the dignity of this Ummah, knowing that it is abhorrent to us. People today have neglected this great duty, and pursued what they love, thinking good lies in what they love, and failing to realize that good lies in that which Allah has legislated.
Before we embark on a detailed exposition concerning the Islamic verdict on martyrdom operations, it is appropriate for us to first present a brief, to-the-point response:
Secondly: We request our respected brothers, who seek the truth, not to criticize us for anything without backing the criticism with verdicts of scholars, and [especially] the understanding of the Pious Predecessors.
Thirdly: Dear brothers and sisters! Not every martyrdom operation is legitimate, nor is every martyrdom operation prohibited. Rather, the verdict differs based on factors such as the enemy’s condition, the situation of the war, the potential martyr’s personal circumstances, and the elements of the operation itself. Thus, one may not give a verdict on such operations without having an understanding of the actual situation, and this is obtained from the Mujahideen, and not the unbelievers. How, then, can you accuse us of ignorance when you are unaware of our situation, let alone the specific details of the operation in question?
Martyrdom or self-sacrifice operations are those performed by one or more people, against enemies far outstripping them in numbers and equipment, with prior knowledge that the operations will almost inevitably lead to death.
The form this usually takes nowadays is to wire up one’s body, or a vehicle or suitcase with explosives, and then to enter amongst a conglomeration of the enemy, or in their vital facilities, and to detonate in an appropriate place there in order to cause the maximum losses in the enemy ranks, taking advantage of the element of surprise and penetration. Naturally, the enacter of the operation will usually be the first to die.
Another technique is for an armed Mujahid to break into the enemy barracks, or area of conglomeration, and fire at them at close-range, without having prepared any plan of escape, nor having considered escape a possibility. The objective is to kill as many of the enemy as possible, and he will almost certainly die.
The name ‘suicide-operations’ used by some is inaccurate, and in fact this name was chosen by the Jews to discourage people from such endeavours. How great is the difference between one who commits suicide – because of his unhappiness, lack of patience and weakness or absence of iman and has been threatened with Hell-Fire – and between the self-sacrificer who embarks on the operation out of strength of faith and conviction, and to bring victory to Islam, by sacrificing his life for the upliftment of Allah’s word!
As for the effects of these operations on the enemy, we have found, through the course of our experience that there is no other technique which strikes as much terror into their hearts, and which shatters their spirit as much. On account of this they refrain from mixing with the population, and from oppressing, harassing and looting them. They have also become occupied with trying to expose such operations before they occur, which has distracted them from other things. Praise is to Allah. Many of their imminent plans were foiled, and furthermore, Putin issued a severe condemnation of the Home Affairs and Defense Ministers, placing the responsibility on them, and threatening high-level reshufflings in the two ministries. Those troops who are not busy trying to foil martyrdom operations are occupied with removal of Russian corpses, healing the wounded, and drawing out plans and policies from beneath the debris. This is all on the moral (sic) level.
On the material level, these operations inflict the heaviest losses on the enemy, and are lowest in cost to us. The cost of equipment is negligible in comparison to the assault; in fact the explosives and vehicles were captured as war-booty, such that we returned them to the Russians in our special way! The human casualty is a single life, who is in fact a martyr and hero gone ahead to Gardens of Eternity, inshaa-Allah.
As for the enemy, their losses are high; after the last operation, they had over 1,600 dead and wounded, and the most crucial concentration of Russian forces in Chechnya was completely destroyed.
All of this was achieved by the efforts of only four heroes. We feel sure that the Russians will not remain long in our land with such operations continuing. Either they will fear aggregation, in which case they will become easy targets for attack, or they will gather together to combat the assaults, in which case the martyrdom operations will be sufficient – Allah willing – to disperse them. If they wish to keep matters under control, they would need more than 300,000 troops in every city, and this is no exaggeration.
One can see how much fear the operations in Palestine caused, and that they were a major factor in convincing the Jews to grant self-rule to the Palestinians, hoping that they could be more easily controlled in that way.
In Chechnya, the damage is much greater than in similar operations in Palestine, on account of Russian fortification being much less than that possessed by the Jews.
Before going into the verdict concerning the operations, citing the pronouncements of scholars about them, and resolving some unclear issues, it is appropriate for us to first present some of the Shar`i (Islamic law) evidences, and then follow them up with discussion and application thereof.
We will not analyze the chains of transmission of each narration separately; we will regard it as sufficient that the basis of the evidence is in the collections of Bukhari and Muslim, and hence any reports outside of these two books is strengthened by them.
1 – “Verily, Allah has purchased from the believers their selves and their wealth, in return for Heaven being theirs. They fight in the path of Allah and they kill and are killed ” [Qur’an, 9:111]
Hence, any scenario in which the Mujahid offers the purchase price in order to attain the merchandise is permissible unless an evidence exists to specifically prohibit it.
2 – “How many a small force has overcome a numerous force, by the permission of Allah. And Allah is with the steadfast ones.” [Qur’an, 2:249]
This verse indicates that the measure of power in the Shari`ah is not primarily linked to material, worldly measures.
3 – “Among mankind is he who sells himself seeking the pleasure of Allah. And Allah is Pitying towards the servants.” [Qur’an, 2:207]
According to the explanation of this verse by the Sahabah, as we cite below, one who sells himself for the sake of Allah is not considered to have committed suicide, even if he immerses himself into 1,000 of the enemy forces without armour.
4 – In the hadith in Sahih Muslim, containing the account of the boy and the king in the story of the Trenches referred to by Surah al-Buruj, we find that the unbelieving king tried various means to kill the believing boy, failing each time. Eventually, the boy told him, “You will not be able to kill me until … you gather people on one plateau, hang me on a palm-trunk, take an arrow from my quiver, place it in the bow, say, “In the name of Allah, the Lord of the boy,” and shoot me.” The king did this, and thereby managed to kill the boy as predicted, but the people who had gathered began saying, “We believe in Allah, the Lord of the boy!” Thereupon, the king ordered trenches to be dug, and fires lit in them, and then for the people to be made to jump into them if they refused to give up their faith. This was done, and eventually a woman was brought with her infant, and she hesitated to jump on account of him, but he said, “O mother! Remain steadfast for you are upon the truth.” The boy, in this hadith, ordered the king to kill him in the interest of the religion, and this indicates that such a deed is legitimate, and not considered suicide.
5 – Imam Ahmad has narrated in his Musnad (1/310) [and a similar narration is in Ibn Majah (4030)] that Ibn `Abbas said that the Messenger of Allah said, “On the night in which I was taken by night, a pleasant fragrance came my way, and so I said, “O Gabriel! What is this pleasant fragrance?” He said, “This is the fragrance of the hairdresser of Pharaoh’s daughter, and [of the hairdresser]’s children.” I said, “What is her situation?” He said, “While she was combing Pharaoh’s daughter’s hair one day, the comb fell from her hand, so she said, “In the name of Allah.” Pharaoh’s daughter asked, “[You mean] my father?” She said, “No, rather my Lord, and the Lord of your father, is Allah.” She said, “Can I tell him that?” She said, “Yes.”” The hadith goes on to describe that a huge brass pot was heated, and it was ordered for her and her children to be cast therein. She requested from Pharaoh – and he acceded to her request – that her bones and her children’s bones be gathered in a single cloth and buried. Her children were then thrown into the cauldron one by one before her eyes, until they got to a suckling infant, and it seemed she wavered on account of him, but he said, “O mother! Jump in, for the torture of this world is lighter than the punishment of the Hereafter.” So she jumped in.
The narrators of the chain [of Imam Ahmad’s version] are reliable, apart from Abu `Umar al-Dareer, whom al-Dhahabi and Abu Hatim al-Razi considered truthful, and Ibn Hibban considered reliable.
According to this hadith, the child was made to speak, as was the child in the preceding story of the trenches, telling the mother to jump into the fire, which indicates the virtue of this deed.
6 – Abu Dawud (3/27) and Tirmidhi (4/280) have narrated (and Tirmidhi graded it as sahih) that Aslam ibn `Imran narrated that when they were fighting a mighty army of the Romans, a man in the Muslim army attacked the Roman ranks until he penetrated them. People shouted, saying, “SubhanAllah! He has contributed to his own destruction.” Thereupon, Abu Ayyub al-Ansari stood up, and said, “O people! You give this interpretation to this verse, whereas it was revealed concerning us, the Ansar, when Allah had given honour to Islam and its supporters had become many, whereupon some of us secretly said to one another … “Our wealth has been depleted, and Allah has given honour to Islam and its supporters have become many, so let us stay amidst our wealth and make up what has been depleted of it.” Thereupon, Allah revealed to His Prophet [meaning] ‘And spend in the Path of Allah, and do not contribute to your own destruction’ [Qur’an, 2:195] refuting what we had said. So, the destruction lay in staying with our wealth and repleting it, and abandoning combat.” Abu Ayyub remained fixed until he [was killed and] was buried in Rome.
Al-Hakim authenticated it, saying it conforms to the criteria of Bukhari and Muslim, and Dhahabi corroborated him. Nasa’i and Ibn Hibban also narrated it. Bayhaqi included it, and other narrations in his Sunan in a chapter entitled, “Permissibility of a man or men fighting alone in the enemy land,” thereby citing it as evidence for the permissibility of advancing against a group, even if the more likely result is that they will kill him.
In this hadith, Abu Ayyub explained that the verse (Qur’an, 2:195) does not apply to one who plunges into the enemy ranks alone, even though it may seem to people that he is destroying himself. The Sahabah tacitly confirmed this explanation of his [by not objecting].
7 – Ibn Abi Shaybah has narrated in his Musannaf (5/338) that Mu`adh ibn `Afra’ asked the Messenger of Allah, “What makes Allah laugh upon His slave?” The reply: “[The servant] immersing himself into the enemy without armour.” Mu`adh then took off his armour and fought until he was killed.
This hadith is a clear evidence for the virtue of Jihad operations in which it is most likely that one will die, and it indicates that Jihad has some special rules which permit what may normally be prohibited.
8 – Ibn Abi Shaybah has extracted (5/289) [and similarly Tirmidhi (2491 and 2492, the latter narration he classified as sahih) and Nasa’i (1597 and 2523), and Ahmad (20,393), as well as Tabarani (in al-Kabir, with a hasan chain) and Ibn al-Mubarak (in Kitab al-Jihad, 1/84)], “Three [categories of people] Allah loves,…” and among them is “a man who was in a dispatchment and met the enemy, and they were defeated, but he faced them with his chest until he was killed or victorious.” Al-Hakim also narrated it, and said it is sahih.
9 – Ahmad narrated in his Musnad (6/22) from Ibn Mas`ud that the Prophet said, “Our Sustainer marvels at two men: a man who stirs from his bed … to salah… and a man who fights in the path of Allah, and his companions are defeated, and he realizes what awaits him in defeat and what awaits him in returning [to combat], but he returns [to combat] until his blood is spilled. Allah says, “Look at My servant who went back [to combat] hopeful and anxious for what is with Me, until his blood was spilled.” Ahmad Shakir said,: its chain is sahih. Haythami said in Majma` al-Zawa’id: Ahmad ad Abu Ya`la narrated it, as did Tabarani in al-Kabir, and its isnad is hasan. Abu Dawud and Al-Hakim narrated it in abbreviated form, and Al-Hakim authenticated it. Ibn al-Nahhas said: even if there were only this single authentic hadith, it would suffice us as evidence for the virtue of plunging [into the enemy ranks].
10 – Muslim has narrated from Abu Hurayrah, “Among the best of lives for people is a man who clasps the reins of his horse in the path of Allah, rushing on its back; whenever he hears a cry [of battle] or advancement towards the enemy, he hurries to it, seeking death and being slain with eagerness.” This indicates that seeking to be killed and pursuing martyrdom are legitimate and praiseworthy acts
11 – Bayhaqi has narrated in Al-Sunan al-Kubra (9/100) with a sahih chain from Mujahid that the Prophet sent out `Abdullah ibn Mas`ud and Khabbab as one dispatchment, and Dihyah as a dispatchment on his own.
This indicates that regardless of the level of risk in a Jihad operation, it remains permissible by default, and the greater the risk, the greater the reward.
12 – Bukhari and Muslim have narrated that Talhah shielded the Prophet from arrows in the Battle of Uhud, and his hand was crippled thereby.
13 – Bukhari and Muslim have reported that Salamah ibn al-Akwa` was asked, “For what did you pledge allegiance to the Prophet on the Day of Hudaybiyyah?” He said, “For death.”
14- Many have reported from Muhammad ibn Thabit ibn Qays Ibn Shimas, when the Muslims were disclosed on the Day of Yamamah, Salim, the freed-slave of Abu Hudhayfah, said, “This is not how we used to act with the Messenger of Allah.” Then, he dug a trench for himself, and stood in it carrying the flag, and fought until he was killed as a martyr on the Day of Yamamah.
This and the next report indicate that steadfastness is desirable, even if it leads to death, and Salim attributed this type of action to the [days of] the Messenger of Allah.
15 – Ibn Jareer Tabari has narrated in his Tarikh (2/151) that in the Battle of Mu’tah, Ja`far ibn Abi Talib took the flag and fought until he became immersed in the fighting, whereupon he turned to a light-colored horse he had and wounded it [so he could not escape], then he fought until he was killed. Hence, Ja`far was the first Muslim to wound his horse [in this manner].
16 – Muslim has narrated that a man heard a Sahabi saying, when the enemy was near, “The Messenger of Allah said : The doors of Heaven are under the shade of the swords.” The man, upon hearing this, got up and asked for verification of the hadith. When it was confirmed, he turned to his companions, gave them the greeting of salam, broke and discarded the scabbard of his sword and then advanced to the enemy with his sword, striking them until he was killed.
[The original study in Arabic contains 40 narrations, but for brevity we have omitted the remainder].
Having established the permissibility of plunging into the enemy and attacking alone even when death is certain, we proceed and say that the martyrdom operations are derived from this principle, realizing that the prohibition of suicide relates to deficiency or absence of faith. However, the former generations did not have knowledge of martyrdom operations in their current-day form, for these evolved with the changes in techniques of warfare, and hence they did not specifically address them. However, they did address similar issues, such as that of attacking the enemy single-handed and frightening them with one’s own death being certain. They also deduced general principles under which the martyrdom operations fall, and in doing so they relied on evidences such as those we have mentioned in the previous section.
There is one difference between the martyrdom operations and their classical precedent, namely that in our case the person is killed by his own hand, whereas in the other he was killed by the enemy. We also explain that this difference does not affect the verdict.
A. Scholars of the Sahabah and Tabi`in
1 – Ibn al-Mubarak and Ibn Abi Shaybah (5/303) have reported, through a sahih chain, that Mudrik ibn `Awf al-Ahmasi said, “I was in the presence of `Umar when the messenger of Nu`man ibn Muqrin cam to him and `Umar asked him about the people, whereupon he replied, “So-and-so and so-and-so were hit, and others and others whom I do not know.” `Umar said, “But Allah knows them.” [The messenger] said, “O chief of the believers! [There was] a man who sold his life.” At this Mudrik said, “That is my maternal uncle, by Allah, O chief of the believers! People claimed he has contributed to his own destruction.” `Umar said, “They have lied (or: are mistaken). Rather, he is among those who have bought the Hereafter with this world.” Bayhaqi mentioned that that was on the day of Nahawand.
2 – Ibn Abi Shaybah has extracted (5/322) that a battalion of unbelievers advanced, and a man of the Ansar faced them and attacked them, and broke through the ranks, then returned, repeating this twice or thrice. Sa`d ibn Hisham mentioned this to Abu Hurayrah, who recited the verse (meaning), “Among mankind is he who sells himself seeking the pleasure of Allah.”
3 – Al-Hakim has extracted in the Book of Tafseer (2/275) and Ibn Abi Hatim (1/128), with a similar narration recorded by Ibn `Asakir, that Bara’ was asked about the verse (meaning), “And spend in the Path of Allah, and do not contribute to your own destruction…”; does it refer to a man who encounters the enemy and fights until he is killed? He said, “No, rather it is a man who commits a sin, and then says Allah will not forgive him.” Al-Hakim said this is authentic according to Bukhari’s and Muslim’s criteria. This explanation of the verse was narrated by Tabari in his exegesis (3/584) from Hudhayfah, Ibn `Abbas, `Ikrimah, Hasan Basri, `Ata’, Sa`id ibn Jubayr, Dahhak, Suddi, Muqatil and others.
B. Verdicts of Renowned Exegetes
1 – Ibn al-`Arabi says in Ahkam al-Qur’an (1/116, and see also Qurtubi’s tafseer 2/364), commenting on the verse, (meaning), “And spend in the Path of Allah, and do not contribute to your own destruction…,” “There are five views about [the meaning of] destruction [here]:
Do not give up spending [in the path of Allah]
Do not go out without provision
Do not abandon Jihad
Do not take on an enemy you are not capable of withstanding
Do not despair of forgiveness
Tabari said: “It is general [in scope], and there is no contradiction between them.” He is right, except regarding plunging into the enemy, for scholars have disagreed concerning this. Qasim ibn Mukhaymirah, Qasim ibn Muhammad and `Abdul-Malik from among our [Maliki] scholars said there is no objection to a man single-handedly taking on a large army, if he is strong and [the action] is sincerely for Allah. If he has no power, then that is self-destruction. It has been said [by some] that if he is seeking martyrdom and his intention is sincere, he can attack, for his goal is to kill one of the enemy forces, and that is clear in the verse (meaning), “Among mankind is he who sells himself seeking the pleasure of Allah.” The correct view by me is that of permissibility of rushing into an army one cannot withstand, for it contains four [possible] aspects:
Seeking martyrdom
Inflicting losses [on the enemy]
Encouraging the Muslims to attack
Demoralizing the enemy, showing them that if one man can do this, what will the totality be capable of!”
2 – Qurtubi says in his Tafseer (2/364), “Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani, the student of Abu Hanifah, said: If a man single-handedly attacks 1,000 pagans, there is no objection to itif there is hope of success, or inflicting loss on the enemy, otherwise it is disliked, for then he would expose himself to death without benefit to the Muslims. As for someone whose aim is to embolden the Muslims to emulate his feat, it’s permissibility is not far-fetched, for it entails benefit to the Muslims in some ways. if his intent is to frighten the enemy, and demonstrate the Muslims’ strength of faith, its permissibility is not far-fetched. If there is benefit in it for the Muslims, then giving one’s life for the strengthening of the religion and weakening of the unbelievers, then it is the noble rank praised in the verse, (meaning), “Among mankind is he who sells himself seeking the pleasure of Allah.” and other verses.”
As above. Also al-Qurtubi plainly says, “…there is no objection if there is hope of success…” i.e. if the fighter has the chance of surviving and emerging victorious “or inflicting loss on the enemy”. The suicide bomber has no hope of success.
3 – Shawkani says in Fath al-Qadeer (1/297) about the verse of self-destruction, “The reality is that the words have general implication, and are not specific to the circumstances of revelation, and so everything which may be described as worldly or religious self-destruction is covered by it, as stated by Ibn Jareer al-Tabari. Among that which comes under this verse is a man attacking an enemy army which he can neither overcome, nor have any effect beneficial to the Mujahideen.” This implies that if there is a benefit it is permissible.
1 – Hanafi Ibn `Abideen says in his Hashiyah (4/303), “There is no objection to a man fighting alone, even if he thinks he will be killed, provided he achieves something such as killing, wounding or defeating [the enemy], for this has been reported from a number of the Sahabah in the presence of the Messenger of Allah on the Day of Uhud, and he praised them for it. If, however, he knows he will not inflict any loss on them, it is not permissible for him to attack, for it would not contribute to the strengthening of the religion.”
2 – Maliki Ibn Khuwayz-Mandad said, as cited by Qurtubi in his Tafseer (2/364), “As for a man single-handedly attacking 100 or more enemy troops … this has two scenarios: If he is certain, or reasonably so, that he will kill the subject of his attack, and emerge safe, then it is good, and similarly if he is reasonably certain that he will be killed, but will inflict loss or cause damage, or have a beneficial effect for the Muslims, then it is permissible also.” Statements from Qurtubi and Ibn al-`Arabi have already preceded.
3 – Shafi`i In the completion of Al-Majmu` (19/291) by al-Muti`i, we find, “If the number of the unbelievers are twice the numbers of the Muslims, and they do not fear perdition, it is obligatory to stand firm … If they are more convinced than not of destruction, then there are two possibilities:
1. That they may turn back, based on the verse (meaning), “do not contribute to your own destruction…”
2. That they may not turn back, and this is the correct view, based on the verse, (meaning), “When you encounter a force, remain steadfast…”, and because the Mujahid only fights in order to kill or be killed. If the number of the unbelievers exceed twice the numbers of the Muslims, then they may turn back. If they are more convinced than not that they will not be destroyed, then it is better for them to remain steadfast so that the Muslims are not routed. If they are more convinced than not that they will be destroyed, then there are two possibilities:
That they are obliged to turn back, based on the words of Allah (meaning), “do not contribute to your own destruction…” That it is recommended for them to turn back, but not binding, for if they are killed they will attain martyrdom.”
4 – Hanbali Ibn Qudamah says in Al-Mughni (9/309), “If the enemy is more than twice the Muslims’ number, and the Muslims are reasonably certain of victory, then it is preferable to remain steadfast on account of the benefit [involved], but if they turn back it is permissible, for they are not immune to destruction … it is conceivable that they are obliged to stand fast if they are reasonably certain of victory, on account of the benefit, but if they are reasonably certain or being defeated by remaining and being unscathed by turning back, then it is preferable for them to turn back, but if they remain put, it is permissible, for they have a goal of martyrdom, and it is also possible that they will be victorious. If they are reasonably certain of being routed whether they remain put or turn back, then it is preferable for them to remain steadfast to attain the rank or martyrdom, … and also because it is possible they might be victorious.”
Ibn Taymiyyah says, in Majmu` al-Fatawa (28/540), “Muslim has narrated in his Sahih the story of the people of the trenches, in which the boy ordered his own killing for the benefit of the religion, and hence the four imams have allowed a Muslim to immerse himself in the enemy ranks, even if he is reasonably certain that they will kill him, provided there is benefit in that for the Muslims. “
5 – Zahiri Ibn Hazm says in Al-Muhalla (7/294), “Neither Abu Ayyub al-Ansari nor Abu Musa al-Ash`ari criticized a man plunging alone into a raging army and remaining steadfast until he was killed… It has been authentically reported that a man from among the Sahabah asked the Messenger of Allah about what makes Allah laugh upon a servant, and he said, “His immersing himself into the enemy without armour,” whereupon the man removed his armour and entered the enemy [ranks, fighting] until he was killed.”
D. Some Analysis
The hadith of the boy is the strongest of evidences for this issue.
The hadith explains that when the boy saw that his being killed in a specific way would be a means for spreading the religion, and hence he advised the king – from whom Allah had protected him hitherto – how to kill him, for spread of the religion and people’s entering into it was more weighty in his eyes than his remaining alive, and he thereby contributed to taking his own life.
Yes, he did not take it by his own hand, but his opinion was the sole factor leading to his killing. This is just as if a man, suffering from painful wounds, asked someone else to kill him; he would be as guilty of suicide as if he had taken his own life, regardless of who did the killing, for he requested it.
Similarly, Allah praised those who believed in the boy’s Lord; those who were being forced to jump into the pits of fire for refusing to renounce their faith. Nay, even the infant spoke, encouraging its mother to advance when she hesitated about entering the fire. They were praised in Surah al-Buruj, which described their fate as being gardens beneath which flow rivers, and they are called successful. The story of Pharaoh’s daughter’s hairdresser is similar.
We have cited evidences from our Shari`ah which fortify these two hadiths, and nothing has appeared to contradict sacrificing one’s life for raising Allah’s word. Hence, the content of these two hadiths is part of our Shari`ah, according to the majority of scholars.
In fact, we see that this sort of operation was carried out in the presence of the Prophet, and after him by the Sahabah, not once but many times. Furthermore, protection of the religion is the greatest service a Mujahid performs, and the evidences do not leave us with any doubt that a Mujahid may sacrifice his life for the religion. Talhah shielded the Prophet with his hand, and this supports the permissibility of a person sacrificing himself for others in the interests of the religion.
E. Synopsis
It has transpired that scholars gave, to the issue of plunging single-handed into the enemy with reasonable certainty of being killed, the same verdict as in cases of death being certain, such that whoever permits the latter permits the former.
Further, the majority of scholars gave conditions for the permissibility:
1. Intention
2. Infliction of losses on the enemy
3. Frightening them
4. Strengthening the hearts of the Muslims
Qurtubi and Ibn Qudamah allowed plunging into the enemy with only a sincere intention, even if no other conditions are fulfilled, for seeking martyrdom is legitimate. Since there is no explicit stipulation of the majority’s conditions in narrations, this view appears preferable. The majority deduced their conditions from general standards of the Shari`ah, but the general need not restrict the specific. Yes, we do say that if there is no benefit to the Muslims or the Mujahideen, an action should not be carried out, and is not the most optimal practice, but this is apart from the original permissibility of the act, for to condemn one seeking martyrdom without a firm basis is an injustice.
The Issue of using Prisoners as a Human Shield
The issue of killing Muslim prisoners whom the enemy has used as a human shield resembles the issue at hand, although there is also a difference between them. The similarity is that both involve ending a Muslim life in the interests of the religion. The difference between the issues is that killing those used as a shield was permitted by scholars out of necessity, for there does not exist any text permitting the taking of someone else’s life, rather it derives from the public interest overshadowing the individual interest.
Hence, killing prisoners used as a shield is based on the rule of necessity permitting the unlawful, and of choosing the lesser of two evils when one is inevitable. As for martyrdom operations, no such rules need be applied, for we have clear texts encouraging plunging into the enemy ranks in spite of the certainty of being killed, and it is not a case of necessity.
Killing another person is an even greater sin than killing oneself; Qurtubi cites in his Tafseer (10/183) consensus of scholars that anyone who is coerced to kill someone else may not comply. Hence whoever allows killing another Muslim, where no textual evidence exists, but for an overwhelming religious benefit, should similarly allow killing oneself for an overwhelming benefit, for the taking of one’s own life is less serious than taking someone else’s life. This would be even if we did not have any texts to support martyrdom operations, although we actually do have specific evidences, as mentioned earlier.
The Muslim army is ordinarily prohibited from killing not only Muslims, but also dhimmis (unbelievers living as protected subjects of the Muslim state), as well as old men, women and children from among the unbelievers. If Muslim prisoners of war are used by the unbelievers then it is not permissible to fire on them except in cases of dire necessity. In the case of women and children of the unbelievers, however, they could be fired upon for an expediency of war even if it is not dire necessity, for war may need such action, but the intention should not be specifically to kill the non-combatants.
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his Household) was asked about the pagans being hit by night, and some women and children being killed in the process, and he replied, “They are from among them.” [Bukhari and Muslim] In the case of Muslims, however, firing is permissible only if abstaining will lead to a wholesale harm, such as a greater number of Muslims being killed than those being used as a shield, or the Muslims being defeated and their land overrun. In such a case, any Muslims killed as a result will be raised up according to their intentions.
The majority consider it obligatory to attack the enemy in cases of necessity, even if it leads to the members of a human shield being killed. [See: Shawkani’s Fath al-Qadeer (5/447), Mughni al-Muhtaj (4/244), Hashiyat al-Dusuqi (2/178), and Ibn Qudamah’s al-Mughni (10/505)] The author of Mughni al-Muhtaj gives two conditions which should be satisfied:
1. That the Mujahideen try their best to avoid hitting the shield deliberately.
2. That they do not intend to kill the people in the shield.
Ibn Taymiyyah said, “If the unbelievers use Muslims as a human shield, and the unbelievers cannot be repelled without killing [the Muslims], then [the Muslim army may fire], for inflictions and afflictions may smite one in this world who does not deserve it in the Hereafter, and it counts as a misfortune for him [for which he may be rewarded]. Some expressed this by saying, “The killer is a Mujahid and the killed one is a martyr.”” The majority of Hanafis and Malikis, as well as Imam Sufyan al-Thawri, have permitted attacking when the enemy have used a shield of Muslims, whether or not abstaining would be detrimental or lead to defeat, reasoning that otherwise Jihad would never take place. [See: Fath al-Qadeer (5/448), Jassas’ Ahkam al-Qur’an (5/273) and Minah al-Jaleel (3/151)] The weakness of this position is clear, in that the sanctity of a Muslim life is greater than to allow its taking without a clear proof, and moreover such shields are not universally used, and so Jihad would not necessarily come to a halt.
In the case of women, children and old men from among the unbelievers being used as shield, the majority of Hanafis, Shafi`is and Hanbalis have allowed attacking even if it is not a dire necessity. [See: Al-Siyar al-Kabeer (4/1554) Mughni al-Muhtaj (4/224) and Al-Mughni (10/504)] The Malikis differed, but for brevity we will not mention their reasoning. [See: Dardeer’s Al-Sharh al-Kabeer (2/178) and Minah al-Jaleel (3/150).]
The View of the Majority Concerning one who assists in Killing
Plunging into the enemy ranks without hope of escape is the greatest means by which a Mujahid contributes to his death, and contributing to one’s own death is just like killing oneself, just as one who deliberately causes the death of someone is like one who actually killed him.
The majority of scholars, from among the Malikis, Shafi`is and Hanbalis, have subjected one who kills someone by consequence to being killed in retaliation just as in the case of direct murder.
Among the textual bases for this is that which Bukhari has reported, that a boy was assassinated, whereupon `Umar said, “Even if all the inhabitants of San`a took part in it, I would kill them all.” From a rational angle, if killing in retaliation were to be halted in such a case, murder would increase, for murderers would merely use one or more accomplices without fear of being executed for the crime. The monetary compensation of blood-money would not deter all murderers, especially the well-off. Hence it is fitting for all the participants to be executed, and in a similar light the Qur’an describes one who kills one person to be like one who has killed all mankind. [See: Al-Sayl al-Jarrar (4/397), Tafseer al-Qurtubi (2/251), Majmu` Fatawa Ibn Taymiyyah (20/382), Al-Bahr al-Ra’iq (8/354), Sam`ani’s Qawati` al-Adillah (2/243)] So, if one who kills himself by plunging into the enemy is praised, then this praise applies independent of the weapon and manner in which he gives up his life.
We have already mentioned in evidence 14 the Sahabi’s action, and no criticism or stipulation has been recorded from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) of such a practice. Hence, if allowing oneself to be killed by the enemy is allowed when it is in the interests of the Muslims, then clearly killing oneself for the same purpose should be allowed, and in such a case a Mujahid is exempted from the general texts which prohibit taking one’s own life.
Definition of a Shaheed (martyr)
Nawawi has enumerated [in Sharh Sahih Muslim (1/515) and Al-Majmu` (1/277)] seven explanations for why the martyr is called Shaheed:
(1) Because Allah and the Prophet have testified concerning his entry into Heaven
(2) Because he is alive before his Lord
(3) Because the angels of mercy witness the taking of his soul
(4) Because he will be among those who testify over nations on the Day of Resurrection
(5) Because his faith and good ending have outwardly been witnessed
(6) Because he has a witness to his death, namely his blood
(7) Because his soul immediately witnesses Heaven.
Ibn Hajar has mentioned fourteen means by which a person can acquire the title, some of them specifically related to being killed in the path of Allah and others not. [See: Fath al-Bari (6/43)] Jurists have given the technical definition of a martyr as follows:
According to the Hanafis:
“One who is killed by the pagans, or is found killed in the battle bearing a mark of any wound, whether external or internal – such as blood emerging from an eye or the like.” [Al-`Inayah published on the margins of Fath al-Qadeer (2/142) and Hashiyat Ibn `Abideen (2/268)] “Anyone who is killed while fighting pagans, or rebels, or brigands, by a means attributed to the enemy – whether directly or by consequence – is a shaheed, anyone who is killed by a means not specifically attributed to [an action of] the enemy is not considered a shaheed.” [Zayla`i’s Tabyeen al-Haqa’iq, (1/247). See also Al-Bahr al-Ra’iq (2/211)]
According to the Malikis:
“One who is killed while fighting warring unbelievers only, even if killed on Islamic land such as if the enemy attacked the Muslims, [even if he] did not fight on account of being unaware or asleep, [and even if] killed by a Muslim who mistook him for an unbeliever, or trampled by a horse, or mistakenly smitten by his own sword or arrow, or by having fallen into a well or from a cliff during the fighting.” [Dardeer’s Al-Sharh al-Kabeer, (1/425)]
According to the Shafi`is:
“One who is killed in fighting unbelievers, facing and not running away, for the raising of Allah’s word…and not for any worldly motive.” [Mughni al-Muhtaj (1/350) and see Fath al-Bari (6/129)]
According to the Hanbalis:
“One who dies in a battle with the unbelievers, whether male or female, adult or not, whether killed by the unbelievers, or by his own weapon in error, or by having fallen off his mount, or having been found dead with no mark, provided he was sincere.” [Kash-shaf al-Qina`, 2/113.
See also Al-Mughni (2/206)] From the above, it transpires that the majority – apart from the Hanafis – do not consider the identity of the killing party to be a factor in determining whether the victim is a shaheed. The majority view emerges preferable, based on:
i. A hadith narrated by Bukhari (4196) in which `Aamir while trying to kill an enemy man during the battle of Khaybar, mistakenly killed himself instead. Someone said he had invalidated his good deeds, but the Prophet said, “Whoever says that is lying (or mistaken). Verily, he is has two rewards,” and he coupled two of his fingers, “He is a striver and a Mujahid.”
ii. A hadith narrated by Abu Dawud (2539) about a Sahabi who mistakenly hit himself with his own sword, and people asked, “Is he a shaheed?”, whereupon it is reported that the Prophet said, “Yes, and I am a witness for him.”
Some people may waver about the permissibility of martyrdom operations because the Mujahid is killing himself. In order to dispel this confusion, we may remind ourselves that the Shari`ah often gives a differing verdict about two actions which externally appear the same, but differ in the intentions behind them. E.g.
Marrying a divorced woman is permissible, but doing so with the sole intention of making her permissible to the first husband is prohibited.
Paying back a loan with more than was borrowed is allowed, but if the excess is stipulated in the contract, it is prohibited, being riba.
One who performs Jihad in order to raise aloft the word of Allah is a Mujahid, but one who fights for the sake of showing off bravery is among the first who will be taken to Hell.
Mistakenly striking oneself with one’s own weapon makes one shaheed (according to the majority) but deliberately killing oneself to escape the pain of wounds makes one deserving of Hell.
These examples, all based on the hadith, “Verily, actions are only according to intentions…”, clearly support the notion that the verdict concerning the shaheed does not differ based on who the killing party is, provided the intention is pure.
So, one who has a bad intention and is killed by the enemy is deserving of the Fire, as would be the case if he kills himself out of pain. And, one who has a sincere intention will be in Heaven, whether he is killed by the enemy, or kills himself in error. And, one who helps in killing himself for the good of the religion will be in Heaven, like the boy, inshaa-Allah.
Definition of Suicide
Suicide here refers to killing oneself on account of anger, pain or some other worldly motive, and scholars are unanimous that it is prohibited and moreover a major sin, making the offender deserving of Hell – either eternally if he legitimizes the act, or for a finite duration [if he did not legitimize it and died as a Muslim]. “Do not kill yourselves. Verily, Allah is merciful to you. And, whoever does that, out of animosity and , We shall burn him in a Fire. And that is easy for Allah.” [Qur’an, 4:29-30; See Tafseer al-Qurtubi, (5/156)] “Among those before you, there was a man with a wound, and he was in anguish, so he took a knife and cut his hands, and the blood did not stop until he died. Allah said, “My servant has hastened the ending of his life, so I have prohibited Heaven to him.” [Bukhari and Muslim] “Whoever strangles himself will be strangling himself in the Fire, and whoever stabs himself will be stabbing himself in the Fire.” [Bukhari and Muslim] The authentic ahadith on this subject are many. In fact, we have been ordered not to even wish for death.
“Let not any of you wish for death on account of harm which has befallen him. But, if he must, he should pray, ‘O Allah! Keep me alive as long as life is better for me, and take my life when death is better for me.” [Bukhari and Muslim]
All of these texts prohibiting suicide related to killing oneself for worldly motives such as pain or anguish or lack of patience, and not for raising aloft the Word of Allah. We have already cited the evidences for permitting a Mujahid to plunge into the enemy ranks without armour, and these exempt the Mujahid from the generality of the suicide texts.
Can one then say that one who kills himself in order to lift the Word of Allah – to inflict losses on the enemy, to frighten them, and with a sincere intention – can we describe him as one committing suicide? That is a grave slander.
We say that the prohibition of suicide is on account of its resulting from weakness or lack of faith, whereas the Mujahid in a martyrdom operation is killing himself on account of the strength of his faith. The boy in the account of the Trenches referred to in Surah al-Buruj effectively killed himself for such a reason, and his deed was praiseworthy.
Similarly, the Prophet wished for death in the Path of Allah not once but thrice [the hadith was cited at the start of the article], and it was permissible because it was not on account of harm which had befallen him, but rather it emanated from strong faith. So, when the rationale of the prohibition of suicide becomes clear, one arrives at the conclusion that martyrdom operations are permissible and praiseworthy when undertaken for some religious benefit.
Synopsis
We have arrived at the conclusion that martyrdom operations are permissible, and in fact the Mujahid who is killed in them is better than one who is killed fighting in the ranks, for there are gradations even among martyrs, corresponding to their role, action effort and risk undertaken. Then, we explained how martyrdom operations are the least costly to the Mujahideen and most detrimental to the enemy. We have heard, as you must have, that most scholars today permit such operations; at least 30 Fatawa have been issued to this effect. We explained how this issue is derived from the issue of plunging single-handedly into the enemy ranks; something which is praiseworthy by the agreement of jurists. We then further stated that we preferred the view that such an action is permissible even if martyrdom is the only goal, although it is certainly not the optimal practice. Martyrdom operations should not be carried out unless certain conditions are met:
1. One’s intention is sincere and pure – to raise the Word of Allah.
2. One is reasonably sure that the desired effect cannot be achieved by any other means which would guarantee preservation of his life.
3. One is reasonably sure that loss will be inflicted on the enemy, or they will be frightened, or the Muslims will be emboldened.
4. One should consult with war strategy experts, and especially with the amber of war, for otherwise he may upset plan and alert the enemy to their presence.
If the first condition is absent, the deed is worthless, but if it is satisfied while some others are lacking, then it is not the best thing, but this does not necessarily mean the Mujahid is not shaheed.
We also explained how causing a death carries the same verdict as actual killing. Hence one who plunges without armour into the enemy ranks, being certain of death, just like one who engages in a martyrdom operation, is effectively causing his own death, but they are praiseworthy because of the circumstances and intention, and hence are not considered to have committed suicide. We also clarified that [according to the majority] the identity of the killer does not have an effect on whether the Mujahid will be considered shaheed. This dispels the wavering arising from the fact that the Mujahid is taking his own life. Thus, such operations could take on any of the five Shar`i verdicts depending on intention and circumstances. Finally, we clarified that taking one’s own life is not always blameworthy; rather it is contingent on the motives behind it. So, we conclude that one who kills himself because of his strong faith and out of love for Allah and the Prophet, and in the interests of the religion, is praiseworthy.
Conclusion
Finally, we should point out that this topic needs a much more expansive study. However, we are thankful to Allah for having allowed us to complete this. If we are correct, it is due to Allah, and if we have erred, then all humans are prone to error. Finally, let the scholars and students of knowledge approach us with their feedback and advice, for we are in need of such help. Let them fear Allah in discharging their responsibility to us.
And peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah, who rightly strove in the Path of Allah until he left this world, and also upon his Household and Companions and those who follow them in goodness until the Day of Judgment.
And our final words are praise to Allah, Lord of the Worlds.

Synopsis of reply to the above

Today I have perfected your deen for you
and completed My blessing upon you
and I am pleased with Islam as a deen for you.
(Surat al-Ma’idah: 3)



**  If the author was "anonymous" did it really deserve such a long dissertation? (BAFS)

6 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSSfeed for comments on this post.

1.      Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.B.A.Frémaux-Soormallysays

2.      Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.B.A.Frémaux-Soormallysays

3.      Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.adminsays

4.      Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.B.A.Frémaux-Soormallysays

5.      Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.Aztecsays

6.      Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.adminsays