DHUL-QURNAYN
-
http//www.helleniccomserve.com/alexander.html
Alexander's speech at Opis in 324 BC, otherwise known as Alexander's Oath, given about one year before his death in the presence of 9,000 Greek and Asian officers, has become the beacon of state leaders and international organizations in their route toward the third millennium. The main points which he made in this speech are as follows
? Now that the wars are over, I wish you to find happiness through peace.
? May all mortals live from now on in harmony, as one nation, for the sake of common prosperity.
? Consider the world as your country, with common laws, governed by men of merit, regardless of race.
? I do not distinguish between Greeks and barbarians, as do the narrow-minded.
? I am not interested in the country or race of origin of people.
? I only distinguish people according to their virtues.
? To me every virtuous foreigner is Greek and each non-virtuous Greek is worse than a barbarian.
? If you are ever faced with differences, do not resort to arms, but resolve them peacefully. If need be, I can act as your arbitrator.
? God should not be viewed as an authoritarian ruler, but as our common father.
? As for myself, I consider all persons, black or white, as equals.
? I wish you to be my partners and not just members of our commonwealth.
? As far as I am able, I shall see to it that all my promises come true.
? Regard this oath as a symbol of love.
Alexander's comments to Diogenes during their brief encounter in Corinth, his policy during his expedition to the East, culminating with the oath at Opis and the historic statement, recorded by Diodorus, that the "enemies were required by the conqueror to be happy," all attest to the fact that Alexander's ambition was to civilize and not to conquer.
Jews throughout the centuries have been using the name Alexander. This has been in accordance with their high priest's decision that "Alexander's name should remain in eternity." The decision was taken because, when Alexander visited Jerusalem, her exhibited respect towards the high priest and for the Jewish religious worship. It is said that when the Jews of Jerusalem offered Alexander gold and silver, he refused to accept them; the Jewish high priest told Alexander "We serve only one God who created Heaven and Earth and all visible and invisible things that no human being is able to explain." To this Alexander replied, "As worthy worshippers of the true God, be in peace, for your God is my God and my peace is your peace. I shall not treat you any different from the other nations, since you serve the living God."
I'd say it's compelling evidence who "TWO HORNS" was along with the coin of course...
http//www.livius.org/a/1/alexander/alexander_horns_coin.jpg
Peace
-
http//www.helleniccomserve.com/alexander.html
Alexander's speech at Opis in 324 BC, otherwise known as Alexander's Oath, given about one year before his death in the presence of 9,000 Greek and Asian officers, has become the beacon of state leaders and international organizations in their route toward the third millennium. The main points which he made in this speech are as follows
? Now that the wars are over, I wish you to find happiness through peace.
? May all mortals live from now on in harmony, as one nation, for the sake of common prosperity.
? Consider the world as your country, with common laws, governed by men of merit, regardless of race.
? I do not distinguish between Greeks and barbarians, as do the narrow-minded.
? I am not interested in the country or race of origin of people.
? I only distinguish people according to their virtues.
? To me every virtuous foreigner is Greek and each non-virtuous Greek is worse than a barbarian.
? If you are ever faced with differences, do not resort to arms, but resolve them peacefully. If need be, I can act as your arbitrator.
? God should not be viewed as an authoritarian ruler, but as our common father.
? As for myself, I consider all persons, black or white, as equals.
? I wish you to be my partners and not just members of our commonwealth.
? As far as I am able, I shall see to it that all my promises come true.
? Regard this oath as a symbol of love.
Alexander's comments to Diogenes during their brief encounter in Corinth, his policy during his expedition to the East, culminating with the oath at Opis and the historic statement, recorded by Diodorus, that the "enemies were required by the conqueror to be happy," all attest to the fact that Alexander's ambition was to civilize and not to conquer.
Jews throughout the centuries have been using the name Alexander. This has been in accordance with their high priest's decision that "Alexander's name should remain in eternity." The decision was taken because, when Alexander visited Jerusalem, her exhibited respect towards the high priest and for the Jewish religious worship. It is said that when the Jews of Jerusalem offered Alexander gold and silver, he refused to accept them; the Jewish high priest told Alexander "We serve only one God who created Heaven and Earth and all visible and invisible things that no human being is able to explain." To this Alexander replied, "As worthy worshippers of the true God, be in peace, for your God is my God and my peace is your peace. I shall not treat you any different from the other nations, since you serve the living God."
I'd say it's compelling evidence who "TWO HORNS" was along with the coin of course...
http//www.livius.org/a/1/alexander/alexander_horns_coin.jpg
Peace
Hatred for muslim history
Love for non muslim historyAgain double standard (in built defect of Quranists)
-
Salam,
On the subject of Dhul-Qarnain, I was looking recently at a place on the Danube river called
Iron Gates. The place is a narrow strip where the river is squeezed through two large mountain gaps making it 150 meters in width or so. I could not find the origin of the name, but it would be interesting if Yajooj & Majooj were the names of the two streams that join to make-up the Danube and that the request of the people was to stop the flood waters from destroying their towns.Help of History to explain about Dhul Qurqain.
is hatred only for Hadeeths??????????????????????????????????????????????????? -
Dear Leo,
No offence, but I do not think you have grasped the difference between the Hadiths and history.
History (arab or non-arab) is an attempt to recall or record events that have happened. These events are sometimes recorded correctly, sometimes distorted. Therefore, it is upto the individual to verify and accept or reject with no consequences.
Hadith is about religious law as claimed to be from the messenger. Keeping in-mind that it has been commanded by our Lord to
hear & obey(see 3336, 2451) any and all religious laws without debate or question (there is no option to pick & chose), therefore, the Hadith can only be equated with the authority and strength of the Quran and not to be compared with history or any other examinable facet. And, since the Quran calls itself fully detailed & complete as far as our religious laws and guidance are concerned, then the case is closed and we reject the Hadiths wholeheartedly without question or debate (we hear & obey). -
Hatred for muslim history
Love for non muslim historyAgain double standard (in built defect of Quranists)
Dear; you are acting paranoid and assume too much. Only one sentence above was mine
I'd say it's compelling evidence who "TWO HORNS" was along with the coin of course...
History is 100% authenticated!!!
Then shall we follow the sunna of Alexander the Great?
I?ll requote from another post?I?m cool with history ? long as its ONLY history and cross-referenced with other histories/timelines.
Always view histories with suspicion; 100 years from now someone listening to FOX NEWS will not get an unbiased perspective of today's events except for weather/sports scores perhaps. lol
We don?t make history Holy Scripture! More interesting snippets from that article?
Alexander never followed Aristotle's advice that he should treat the Greeks differently than the non-Greeks. By respecting the traditions of the people he conquered, eliminating discrimination and prejudice between conquerors and conquered, Alexander the Great elevated the peoples he conquered from an economic, social and political point of view to a higher echelon.
Alexander's behavior toward the relatives of Persian King Darius whom he had captured (his mother, wife and children), was admired by all for the respect that he showed to these royal family members.
By liberating various cities in the East which were under bondage, Alexander abolished oligarchy and established democracy. He founded cities, theaters, and gymnasia, built new roads, established common currency and promoted commerce among nations. He mitigated Greek civilization in the East and extremely influenced Arab nations. As Dennis Overbye of the New York Times wrote, the meeting of the two civilizations, Greek and Arabian, became an important historic fact. The Arabs translated Greek literary works into Arabic, which subsequently were passed to Europe during the 12th century AD through Latin, thus establishing the basis for the European Renaissance.
It is not by chance that Mohammed the Prophet refers in the Koran to the double-horned King (Alexander) as a prophet who has the ability to punish those committing injuries against others and to reward the individuals who carry out good deeds.
Plutarch, employing Alexander's journal as a source, wrote in his book Parallel Live. Alexander "Also in wine he was less self-indulgent than what he was considered. He was of the habit of staying at the symposia talking much, but drinking little." Plutarch adds that he was also temperate in eating.Film scripts which attempt to portray Alexander the Great as a homosexual are of poor taste and lack seriousness. Plutarch stated in his Moralia. De Alexandri magni fortuna aut virtute "Let us bring up the deeds of those who have generally been identified as philosophers and let us compare their deeds with the deeds of Alexander. Philoxenus, his coast guard commander, wrote to Alexander that he found in Ionia a very handsome boy, one that could be compared to none other in beaut, and that if Alexander wanted the boy, he could send the youth to him. The king replied to him bitterly and in a scolding fashion 'Horrible man, have you known me up to now guilty of such crimes? How dare you flatter me with such vile pleasures?'"
Other points could be brought to disprove Alexander's homosexuality allegations Alexander was married to Roxane and had an heir by her; he was also married to the daughter of Darius; a queen of the East had asked Alexander to father a child with her.
In this age of loss of direction and human dignity, we search for great men to guide and inspire our youth and to elevate the quality of life. Falsification and degradation of the personalities and statuses of long established heroes of history for political or materialistic gains and minimization of their positive effectiveness is not only offensive to every civilized human being, but is also a crime against humanity itself. In the case of Alexander the Great, nothing undertaken by those who now wish to turn historical facts around, in order to try and belittle him or tarnish his fame with unfounded claims, can affect his grandeur and place in history.
That last paragraph above applies very much to "idle tales" of most hadith which many purchase.
The Sun setting in the murky waters of the Nile?
http//www.travelphoto.net/a-photo-a-day/wordpress/wp-content/egypt-photos-0007a-500.jpg
Peace
-
When you take the unauthenticated history of Alexander the great and make him thulQarnain, then you have replaced hadeeth by history in your attempt to understand the Qur'an.
So, do not tell that history is good to learn but not binding, when you are making Qur'anic conclusions based on history alone and nothing else.
Hussein
-
When you take the unauthenticated history of Alexander the great and make him thulQarnain, then you have replaced hadeeth by history in your attempt to understand the Qur'an.
So, do not tell that history is good to learn but not binding, when you are making Qur'anic conclusions based on history alone and nothing else.
Hussein
You are correct, the history is 100% unecessary, what matters is the moral lessons. The Quran avoids specifics, and I suspect that is one of the reasons why.
-
When you take the unauthenticated history of Alexander the great and make him thulQarnain, then you have replaced hadeeth by history in your attempt to understand the Qur'an.
So, do not tell that history is good to learn but not binding, when you are making Qur'anic conclusions based on history alone and nothing else.
No, I read Qur?an then looked into all histories or hearsays which include hadith.
What exactly do you mean by unauthenticated?
Qur?an gave us enough details and we are to use our minds, not follow blindly.
-
Prove any speech made by Alexander the great and then authenticate that the coin was made by him and not several hundred years later. If you feel no reservation in using such data to support your points, then your resistance of hadeeth is based on emotion and not true logic.
Hussein
-
Dear Leo,
No offence, but I do not think you have grasped the difference between the Hadiths and history.
History (arab or non-arab) is an attempt to recall or record events that have happened. These events are sometimes recorded correctly, sometimes distorted. Therefore, it is upto the individual to verify and accept or reject with no consequences.
Hadith is about religious law as claimed to be from the messenger. Keeping in-mind that it has been commanded by our Lord to
hear & obey(see 3336, 2451) any and all religious laws without debate or question (there is no option to pick & chose), therefore, the Hadith can only be equated with the authority and strength of the Quran and not to be compared with history or any other examinable facet. And, since the Quran calls itself fully detailed & complete as far as our religious laws and guidance are concerned, then the case is closed and we reject the Hadiths wholeheartedly without question or debate (we hear & obey).You can equate Hadeeth with Quran but I cannot.
My question is
1If Quran is fully detailed in your sense then why you people have to go google to get details of "Dhul Qurnain" .On the one hand "Quran is fully detailed and on the other hand taking the help of google /Encyclopedias " why this double standard
2Why do you hate to know the background of revelation of ayas
3Why do you not know how did Holy prophet offer his salat?
4Why do you not know how dis he perform Hajj?
5Why do you not know if he understood the meaning of ayat correctly?
Answer these questions.Probably you do not know.After all why ???????? -
Dear; you are acting paranoid and assume too much. Only one sentence above was mine
I'd say it's compelling evidence who "TWO HORNS" was along with the coin of course...
Then shall we follow the sunna of Alexander the Great?
I?ll requote from another post?We don?t make history Holy Scripture! More interesting snippets from that article?
That last paragraph above applies very much to "idle tales" of most hadith which many purchase.
The Sun setting in the murky waters of the Nile?
http//www.travelphoto.net/a-photo-a-day/wordpress/wp-content/egypt-photos-0007a-500.jpg
Peace
When Quran is fully detailed why do you take shelter of external sources ?
If I ask how did the Holy Prophet PBUH used to offer his prayer ? What is your answer ?
613
-
Hopefully not with the pagan phrase "amen".
-
Prove any speech made by Alexander the great and then authenticate that the coin was made by him and not several hundred years later. If you feel no reservation in using such data to support your points, then your resistance of hadeeth is based on emotion and not true logic.
Hussein
I'd say it's compelling evidence who "TWO HORNS" was along with the coin of course...
Compelling is NOT 100% authentic FACT and my resistance to hadith is based mostly that it is illogical, stupid, nonsense, and discard it as such -- you of course are free to believe any 100% authentic hearsay from whomever you like.
Take care.
When Quran is fully detailed why do you take shelter of external sources ?
If I ask how did the Holy Prophet PBUH used to offer his prayer ? What is your answer ?
613
Qur'an is fully detailed with principles and examples to follow the religion.
If I asked you about Big Bang theory, etc., or anything on modern science which hadith or external sources would you use?
If I ask you the same question how exactly to pray according to hadith; what is your answer?
613 Applies to you as do most all other verses you've posted accusing people without knowledge.
-
Compelling is NOT 100% authentic FACT and my resistance to hadith is based mostly that it is illogical, stupid, nonsense, and discard it as such -- you of course are free to believe any 100% authentic hearsay from whomever you like.
Take care.
Qur'an is fully detailed with principles and examples to follow the religion.If I asked you about Big Bang theory, etc., or anything on modern science which hadith or external sources would you use?
If I ask you the same question how exactly to pray according to hadith; what is your answer?
613 Applies to you as do most all other verses you've posted accusing people without knowledge.
You do not know how did Holy Prophet offer the prayer ?
Prophetic history stings you like a scorpion.Why ????
