Who Was the Pharoah of Moses
-
@Noon dhe plume
Go ahead.. Take as many snippets as you want from that article.
And yes, there IS mention in the Arabic books of tradition that the wife of "Faroun", whose name they claim was "Asia", had an Arabic name. Even some historians (notably Yaqoot al Hamwi) have claimed this.
But these sources cannot be trusted or brought anywhere near the level of the QUran, or the archeological evidence. And the latter are alone enough to prove that the events surrounding Joseph, Moses, and the Israelites did not take place in Egypt.
@Pazuzu -- why no answer for the clear proof posted earlier or perhaps you missed it?
Clear archaeological and Qur'an evidence to the contrary was posted for you that Babylonians, Assyrians, and others wrote numerous letters back and forth to the king of current day land of Egypt and he too replied back as ?king land (of) Misri? simply read the Amarna letters/tablets (1350s ? 1330s BCE)
Click here to read their stories ---> http//www.specialtyinterests.net/eae.html
Click here to see transliteration ---> http//oracc.museum.upenn.edu/amarna/corpus
Here is only one exchange EA 001 Amenhotep III of Egypt complains to the Babylonian king Kada?man-Enlil
http//oracc.museum.upenn.edu/cgi-bin/oracc?prod=list&project=amarna&seq=period,genre,provenience,designation&perpage=25&k0=_all&page=1&item=5&trans=en
1 -na mka-da!-a?!-ma-an-en-lil2 LUGAL KUR ka-ra-an-du-ni-ia2-a?
2 ?E?-ia qi2-bi2-ma um-ma mni-ib-mu-a-re-a LUGAL GAL
3 LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-ka-ma a-na ma-ri-ia ?ul-muLUGAL = king
KUR = land?king land (of) Misri?
Amenophis III to Kadasman-Enlil I, No. 1
EA #1 mc(98 lines),See AP Refers to Kadasman-Enlil as King of Kardunias; letter writer refers to himself asNibmuaria', the great king of Egypt'; emphasizes that everything iswell with my house, my wives, my sons, my chief men, my horses, my chariots, my soldiers, ... , my lands'; refers back to `thy tablet' written to himLikewise you skipped and will ask again about the Romans and language?
Shown us where? I asked you where the Romans originated, Arabic?
What language did Dhul-Qarnayn and those people encountered, Arabic?
1892 furthermore followed a means
1893 until when he reached between the two barriers he found from a nation not hardly understand a saying
1894 they said " O you the two horns indeed Yajuj and Majuj corrupters in the earth so shall we offer to you expenditure on that you make between us and between them a barrier?" -
In my theory, muslim scholars and leaders assumed word of "misr" as "land of Egypt" in base of Christian and Jewish traditions long after death of prophet. I think they thought this "correction" will help them for approving Quran and other previous sacred scriptures were same origin.
If they were investigate Quran fair enough and if they had defend Quran with courage, we never have been falling into this trap so easily.
Peace exodus,
It existed over 500 years prior; read The Works of Flavius Josephus (37?100 CE)
http//www.sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/ant-1.htm
Antiquities of the Jews - Book I CHAPTER 6.
- The children of Ham possessed the land from Syria and Amanus, and the mountains of Libanus; seizing upon all that was on its sea-coasts, and as far as the ocean, and keeping it as their own. Some indeed of its names are utterly vanished away; others of them being changed, and another sound given them, are hardly to be discovered; yet a few there are which have kept their denominations entire. For of the four sons of Ham, time has not at all hurt the name of Chus; for the Ethiopians, over whom he reigned, are even at this day, both by themselves and by all men in Asia, called Chusites. The memory also of the Mesraites is preserved in their name; for all we who inhabit this country called Egypt Mestre, and the Egyptians Mestreans. Phut also was the founder of Libya, and called the inhabitants Phutites, from himself there is also a river in the country of Moors which bears that name; whence it is that we may see the greatest part of the Grecian historiographers mention that river and the adjoining country by the apellation of Phut but the name it has now has been by change given it from one of the sons of Mesraim...
Just a simple fact, Moses himself using word of "misr" exactly in "a town/city" form.
261 And when you said O Musa! we cannot bear with one food, therefore pray Lord on our behalf to bring forth for us out of what the earth grows, of its herbs and its cucumbers and its garlic and its lentils and its onions. He said Will you exchange that which is better for that which is worse? Enter a city, so you will have what you ask for. And abasement and humiliation were brought down upon them, and they became deserving of Allah's wrath; this was so because they disbelieved in the communications of Allah and killed the prophets unjustly; this was so because they disobeyed and exceeded the limits.
In this verse word of "misr" used as "misran" which means "a misr" exactly. This situation becames meaningless for a "so-called" land's proper name.
1230 and said women in the city woman/wife the mighty seeking to seduce her youth about himself has infactuated her love indeed surely see her in error clear
261 go down/descend (for) Egypt so indeed to you what you ask
The trailing alif in MSRA is like "to/for" used in English; i.e. they were complaining, said go to Egypt if you want cucumbers, etc. and your other comment about proper name simply read in context...
1221 and said the one who bought him from Egypt
1299 and said enter Egypt if He wills The God safe
-
Peace exodus,
It existed over 500 years prior; read The Works of Flavius Josephus (37?100 CE)
http//www.sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/ant-1.htm
Antiquities of the Jews - Book I CHAPTER 6.
1230 and said women in the city woman/wife the mighty seeking to seduce her youth about himself has infactuated her love indeed surely see her in error clear
261 go down/descend (for) Egypt so indeed to you what you ask
The trailing alif in MSRA is like "to/for" used in English; i.e. they were complaining, said go to Egypt if you want cucumbers, etc. and your other comment about proper name simply read in context...
1221 and said the one who bought him from Egypt
1299 and said enter Egypt if He wills The God safe
Hello Noon dhe plume,
I think that you hadn't got the point what I said exactly. I'm just talking about the word of "misr" used in Quran. If you were capable for checking the transliterations, you may never mention 1230, 1221 and 1299 like above. Yes, this word used in these verses but not same in 261.
Interestingly, 261 proves that the word of "misr" is just an Arabic singular common noun which you can apply simple Arabic grammatical rules that never case for a proper noun. This word used in form of "a book", "a stone" in this verse. This means, this word was used for indicate a settlement where you can apply any place in world in days of revelation. So, this situation should be deformed after death of Muhammad. Because, today, using the word "Misr" while indicating a place in form of "Misran" (An Egypt) is totally pointless.
As my conclusion, "misr" should refer a settlement
- Where ruler lives
- Where constructed with a gate
- Where containing facilities for gathering crops.
If you think fair enough, you may reveal that "misr" is indicating "fortress" type ancient settlements and capital cities.
Regards.
-
I commend all those who have participated in this thread and have thrown in objections to Pazuzu's work. It is good that a theory is put to the test thoroughly so that it can come out as clear as possible.
And I commend Pazuzu for his initiave and work on this theory that I value and that as far as we have come I am inclined to take seriously.
All along the history of history and archeology work has been done taking a many things for granted and that reflects on the religion and the Qur'an. in the last century, films did a lot also to normalise assumption.
I go back to the word MiSr, sounding MaSr. I asked previously if there was in acient Egyptian a word like that and to which root or origin it belonged.
We have got directions to the amarna tables, but what I got there were mentions in something ressembling "MaSr" in sumerian. So what is the writing and transliteration of the word in ancient Egyptian which means Egypt"? Pazuzo has given the one he considers is right. I hoe someone can provide the "counterword" or root.
On the other hand as far as I can see still holds that mSr is an Arabic root which means civilisation, settlement, and similar ideas. I have not seen though the root in the meaning of limit or border, as stated by Mazhar. At any rate its most common usage is the one that means civilisation or civilised settlement.
It being so, when reading the Qur'an the first choice to interpret anything from that root woud have been precisely that, meaning of civilised settlement. If it has been done otherwise, it must have been because it was taken for granted that if it talks about things which have been known from other sources it must relate to those sources, and therefore everything is organised so as to fit that.
The mention of mi-i-[ri-i in a tablet writen in sumerian doesn't tell me much concerning what we are discussing. In Arabic, it still means a civilised settlement, and depending on the gramatical construci?n, a particular civilised settlement, or an indeterminate one, etc. but I have no reason to take it for a particular state or constitud kingdom or nation. It may refer to that, ut there is no reason to take for granted anything.
For instance, say the united states of america. If we know that we are taling about a particular set of them, fine. I f we don't we cannot go from there. If you adress the President of the Mexican United States, you may write the whole title at one point or another, but if youhave a heave correspondence, you may drop the Mexican and let stand the United States, or just the States. But if both the President of the Mexican United States and the President of the United Sates of Brazil, you would signal de difference, so hearers know whom you are talking about. Unfortunatedly the USA, do not have a particular name, but if it had, still I might be adressed as United States, without any addition if no confusion would ensue, but always remembering that there are many "United States".
Japan, ok, Country of the raising sun, the sun raises over every country, if you drop the "country and say raising sun and you know the context, still you may say that with some certainty that it is about Japan it is talking, if not, you know nothing. But if averybody has been speaking about Japan, even without knowing you may take that any raising sun you hear is about Japan.
Of course, I have no idea, and I doubt that enybody in the forum has any idea, of what were current conceptions and misconceptions and usages of those words and concepts and countries and peoples and civilisations, and what each used or understood based on previous knowledge, but I do not see that the traditional interpretation is inescapable, and it does present plenty of glitches, not to say that since the history of history and archeology, theories have been turned around quite many times, and to think that know we know and interpret without error is unrealistic.
Salaam
-
On the other hand as far as I can see still holds that mSr is an Arabic root which means civilisation, settlement, and similar ideas. I have not seen though the root in the meaning of limit or border, as stated by Mazhar. At any rate its most common usage is the one that means civilisation or civilised settlement.
Please see Lane to know the basic perception of the Root.
And limit or boundary between two lands.
And also please read the utterence of the Person who was ruling it, how he defines it-- Mulko Misra-the Country of Two Lands-4309; and does not mean civilization but refers to Land/Country/Dominion.
Archeological findings support the view that the first pharaoh to claim to have united the two lands was Narmer (the final king of the Protodynastic Period). His name is known primarily from the famous Narmer Palette, whose scenes have been interpreted as the act of uniting Upper and Lower Land.
And this is exactly what Misr means and portrays in Araic. -
And this is exactly what Misr means and portrays in Araic
Yeah? Well...we'll just have to see about that.
-
Please see Lane to know the basic perception of the Root.
And limit or boundary between two lands.
And also please read the utterence of the Person who was ruling it, how he defines it-- Mulko Misra-the Country of Two Lands-4309; and does not mean civilization but refers to Land/Country/Dominion.
Archeological findings support the view that the first pharaoh to claim to have united the two lands was Narmer (the final king of the Protodynastic Period). His name is known primarily from the famous Narmer Palette, whose scenes have been interpreted as the act of uniting Upper and Lower Land.
And this is exactly what Misr means and portrays in Araic.I don't make head or tail of what you write. What we are dealing with here is the meaning of miSr in the honoured Qur'an. You cannot use as a proof what you intend to prove, which is what you seem to be doing. You assume that it is talking about Egypt, therefore you make fir3aun ruer of Egypt and say see? even the ruler of Egypt says that, but that is what we are questioning, whether there is such a ruler that is the ruler of Egypt.
43.09 says nothing of what you have written there. I do not know what you are quoting, if you are quoting anything.
Of course mulk does not mean civilised settlement or civilasation, nobody has said that, so in what does that change the meaning of mSr?
The two lands part where do you find it in the Qur'an? just to check. Though even that would not point unquestioningly to Egypt. There are many countries made up of two lands. And dependening on the territorial unit you take into considerations, there would be very many.
And this is exactly what Misr means and portrays in Araic
I take your for for it to be a possible meaning of mSr. I have not seen it anywhere, but I take your word. But even it is so, it does not detract one bit from its promordial meaning which I have mentioned repeatedly, and it doesn't point with any exclusivity to Egypt. Not at all.
Other than that, the aya 43.51 quoted in this thread, depicts fir3aun speaking of the rivers that run under him. In Egypt there are no rivers, there is one river, just one river. However there are other places where there are more than one river, but not in Egypt. Just one. The famous Nile. Just that would show unequivocally that the country he is talking about IS NOT Egypt.
Salaam
-
Other than that, the aya 43.51 quoted in this thread, depicts fir3aun speaking of the rivers that run under him. In Egypt there are no rivers, there is one river, just one river. However there are other places where there are more than one river, but not in Egypt. Just one. The famous Nile. Just that would show unequivocally that the country he is talking about IS NOT Egypt.
Peace huruf,
4351 and called Pharaoh in his nation said O my nation is not to me king MSR/Egypt and these the rivers flow from underneath do they not see
It could be irrigation canals which was and still the livelihood of Egypt or Nile Delta.
http//www.e-c-h-o.org/khd/images/Delta.jpg
Although the phrase is most likened to the rivers in paradise i.e. a fruitful land ...
225 and give good news the ones who believe and do the righteous works that to them gardens flow from beneath them the rivers whenever they are provided from it from fruit provision they said this the one we were provided from before they will be given in it like it and for them in it mates pure and they in her/it abide forever
The Amarna letters/tablets (1350s ? 1330s BCE) posted above are compelling evidence and seems the standard of correspondence between Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hittites, Akkadians, etc. and all used the same transliterated name for the land currently we call Egypt each responding in their own language e.g.
Amenophis III to Kadasman-Enlil I, No. 1
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i
?King land MiSRi?
-
Quote from huruf on Yesterday at 120108 PM
Other than that, the aya 43.51 quoted in this thread, depicts fir3aun speaking of the rivers that run under him. In Egypt there are no rivers, there is one river, just one river. However there are other places where there are more than one river, but not in Egypt. Just one. The famous Nile. Just that would show unequivocally that the country he is talking about IS NOT Egypt.Peace huruf,
4351 and called Pharaoh in his nation said O my nation is not to me king MSR/Egypt and these the rivers flow from underneath do they not see
It could be irrigation canals which was and still the livelihood of Egypt or Nile Delta.
Although the phrase is most likened to the rivers in paradise i.e. a fruitful land ...
225 and give good news the ones who believe and do the righteous works that to them gardens flow from beneath them the rivers whenever they are provided from it from fruit provision they said this the one we were provided from before they will be given in it like it and for them in it mates pure and they in her/it abide forever
The Amarna letters/tablets (1350s ? 1330s BCE) posted above are compelling evidence and seems the standard of correspondence between Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hittites, Akkadians, etc. and all used the same transliterated name for the land currently we call Egypt each responding in their own language e.g.
Amenophis III to Kadasman-Enlil I, No. 1
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i
?King land MiSRi?
ot convincing. Anhar is plural, and different branches of the same river are not called rivers. That is just an assumption in order to fit geogrphy to preconceptions. The river Nile, never has been considered the rivers Niles, except for those at the head of the river well inside Africa, before they join and make the Nile, one river till its end in the Mediterranean.
It may convince you, but I am not convinced.
And fir3aun likening that to Paradise? Is that consistent? If it is with what is it consistent?
For the rest, you repeat the same thing and I already looked into it.
I already saw and checked the amarna tablets (one quoted one of them, the same one which you have quoted in this message, and I did find no other) en that list of tablets.You say now "transliterated name". Transliterated from what to what?
It is still that name in ancient Egyptian that I am missing, an inequivocal presence of that specific name of "Egypt", which you say it is not Egypt and it has naver been Egypt for the ancient Egyptians. The same, for instance that we have with
al Qahira, name of Cairo,
but not "MaSr", which even, if in context, it is spoken and written meaning Cairo most of the time, but which is not the name of Cairo, but a general name used to denote the most eminent specimen of that general meaning, even if it is more widely used that the proper name itself. The same as when Egyptians talk about something in the "balad", or go to the balad, and they mey refer to the city they have in mind, in fact balad is not specifically any city. If they know the cite or locality they are talking about, they arenever going to say its proper name, they will say the "balad". I do not know what the usage is in other Arab speaking countries. May be other people can say something about that, but that is certainly the use in Egypt.
I still do think that there is far more assumption than actual accuracy and detailed verified knowledge about this.
And let us not forget again, that we are talking not about Akadian or sumerians or hitites, but about a specific book in s specific language, and that in that language, miSr, has a general meaning.
Furthermore, most, if not all that is written in Qur'an lacks, on purpose, obviously, much specificity, because the idea is not to write about history, or geogrphy or dates, but to give lessons which are general in meaning. So no need to throw around specific places or dates.
In order to choose this or that as accurate historical facts, there is not enough said here, in my opinion, that sets conclusively the accepted assumptions that Pazuzu and others are contesting as the truth.
Again, the USA, may be the best well known state that is called the United States, but there are other united states, and USA lacks any other name, but if it did have one, most probable, they might still be called generally the United states, like the Reich is not the only Reich, far from that, but if we talk about the Reich we pick the one we think the speaker must be referring to...
Suppose further down history, Mexico becomes far more important than the neighbour to the North, it might well be known as the United States if no doubt arises, with nothing more added. Just like the Reich, in Germany and amongst German speaking people, was the German Reich of that time and not any other Reich.Salaam
-
For the rest, you repeat the same thing and I already looked into it.
I already saw and checked the amarna tablets (one quoted one of them, the same one which you have quoted in this message, and I did find no other) en that list of tablets.Peace -- do search on mi-i-ri in TEXTS http//oracc.museum.upenn.edu/amarna/corpus
It appears on 119 different tablets/letters as KUR (land) Misri or LUGAL KUR (king land) Misri
Middle Babylonian / administrative / Amarna
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i a-na ?E?-?u mbur-na]-bu-ra-ri-ia-a?
(EA 014, i 2 )
a-na mni-im-mu-ri-ia LUGAL mi-i-ri-i ?E?-?u
(EA 022, iv 45 )
DUMU.MI2-su2 a-na KUR mi-i-ri-i -na mni-im-mu-ri-ia
(EA 022, iv 47 )
Middle Babylonian / letter / Amarna
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-iki ?E?-ka-ma a-na ma-ri-ia ?ul-mu
(EA 001, 3 )
?a LUGAL.ME? ?a KUR mi-i-ri-
(EA 001, 51 )
i-na KUR mi--ri-i u3 i-nu-ma ta-a?-pu-ra um-ma-a
(EA 001, 52 )
u2-ul i-na-an-di-nu-na-?i ?a i-la-ku i-na KUR mi-i-ri-i
(EA 001, 68 )
a-na mni-mu-wa-ri-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-
(EA 002, 1 )
-mu--wa-re-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri--ia
(EA 003, 1 )
um-ma-a ul-tu4 pa-na DUMU.MI2 LUGAL ?a KUR mi-i-
(EA 004, 6 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i a-na m]ka-
(EA 005, 2 )
a-na mni?-mu-wa-re-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i]
(EA 006, 1 )
-ru-ri-ia LUGAL GAL ?ar3 KUR mi-i-
(EA 007, 1 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-ia qi2-
(EA 008, 2 )
a-na ni-ip-u-ur-ri-ri-ia LUGAL KUR mi-
(EA 009, 1 )
?um-ma it-ti LUGAL ?a mi-i-ri-i a-i-ia ta-at-ta-ak-ra-ma
(EA 009, 26 )
-ur-ra-re-ia LUGAL KUR mi-
(EA 010, 1 )
a-na mna-ap-u-ru-ri-a LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-
(EA 011, o 1 )
um-ma-a DUMU.MI2 LUGAL GAL i-na 5 GI? GIGIR -na ; KUR mi-i-ri-i na-?u-u2-?i
(EA 011, o 22 )
a-na KUR mi-i-ri i?-pu-ru
(EA 016, 20 )
-na UGU a-bi-ka a-na KUR mi-i-
(EA 016, 23 )
a-na mni-ib-mu-a-re-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i]
(EA 017, 1 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i)] qi-bi2-ma
(EA 018, o 1 )
mnim-mu-ri-ia LUGAL GAL LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-
(EA 019, 1 )
a-na NIN-et KUR mi-i-ri-i-im-me ul ul-te-em-ri-i ?A3-?u
(EA 019, 19 )
Page 1 of 5 ?
Middle Babylonian / letter / Amarna
-mu-u2-a-ri-ia LUGAL KUR ai-ia a-ta-ni-ia
(EA 020, 1 )
?a ?E?-ia a-na be-el-ti KUR mi-i-ri-i a-na le-ge-e u3 up-pa
(EA 020, 9 )
?a KUR mi-i-ri-i be-la-as-su2 a-na--ma u3 a-na ?E?-ia u2-up-pa-lu
(EA 020, 16 )
-lu-u2-tu i-na u4-mi ?a- KUR a-li2-gal-bat u3 KUR mi-i-ri-i
(EA 020, 17 )
iq-ta-bu-u2 i-na KUR mi-i-ri-im-ma-a-me GU?KIN el e-bi-ri ma-a-
(EA 020, 52 )
-an-ni-ma-a-me a-?e-e-ma-a-me el e-bi-ri i-na KUR mi-i-ri-ma-a-ad
(EA 020, 55 )
?E?-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-im-
(EA 020, 59 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-ia
(EA 021, 2 )
a-na mni-im-mu-ri-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i
(EA 023, 1 )
gab2-bi-i-?i-na-ma a-na KUR mi-i-ri-i
(EA 023, 14 )
a-na fte-i-e NIN KUR mi-i-
(EA 026, 1 )
LUGAL.GAL LUGAL KUR mi-i]-ri-i ?E?-ia a-ta-ni-ia ?a ;
(EA 027, 1 )
gab2-bi-i-?u-nu-ma ?a i-na KUR mi-i-ri-i a?-bu i-na IGI.ME?-?u-nu i-ta-am-ru ; u3 ALAM.ME? a-bu-ka-ma
(EA 027, 24 )
a-na mnap-ur-i-ri-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-
(EA 028, 1 )
a-na E2.ME?-ka a-na fte-i-e AMA-ka u3 KUR mi-i--i
(EA 028, 7 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?]-ia a-ta-ni-ia ?a a--am-mu-u2-u? u3 ?a i-ra-
(EA 029, 1 )
-ul iq-bi im-ma-ti-i-me-e GU?KIN.ME? ?a KUR mi-i]-ri-i i-na KUR ; a-li2-gal-bat u2-?e-em-i u3 ?a-ar-ru-um-ma
(EA 029, 49 )
-?u-nu u3 ul-te-ri-bu IR3.ME?-ia re-e-u-tu4 ?a i-na KUR mi-i-ri-i u2-?i-bu mma-
(EA 029, 169 )
a-na UGU LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-ia
(EA 030, 4 )
na-a-ri-i? i-na KUR mi-i-ri-i
(EA 030, 8 )
LU2.al-zu-u-li ?a KUR mi-i-ri-i
(EA 030, 10 )
a-na LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri ?E?-ia
(EA 033, 1 )
a-na LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri a-i-ia-ma
(EA 034, 2 )
LUGAL-ri KUR mi-i-ri ?E?-ia qi2-
(EA 035, 1 )
LU2 DUMU.KIN-ka a-na UGU-ka al-ta-par2 i-na KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 035, 9 )
?Page 2 of 5 ?Middle Babylonian / letter / Amarna
i-dab-bu-bu GI?.ME?-ia ?a KUR mi-i-
(EA 035, 28 )
i-na KUR mi-i-ri mi-it u3 u2-nu-tu-
(EA 035, 31 )
-na LUGAL KUR -ia
(EA 037, 1 )
a-na LUGAL-ri KUR mi-i-ri ?E?-ia qi2-bi2-ma
(EA 038, 1 )
a-na LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri ?E?-ia
(EA 039, 1 )
u3 i-na KUR mi-i-ri KUR-ka
(EA 039, 8 )
MA?KIM2 ?a KUR mi-
(EA 040, 1 )
LUGAL KUR? URU? mi]-i-ri-iki ?E?-ia qi2-bi2-ma
(EA 041, 3 )
a-na be-li2 LUGAL KUR URU.mi-i-ri-i
(EA 044, 1 )
u3 a-na KUR mi-i-
(EA 045, 25 )
-na dUTU-?i LUGAL be-li2-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 051, o 1 )
-mur e-nu-ma mma-na-a-bi-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri a-bi a-bi-ka
(EA 051, o 4 )
i?-ku-un-?u u3 ki-a-am iq-ta-bi ?a LUGAL KUR -ri
(EA 051, o 7 )
u3 a-na ?a LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 051, r 6 )
a-na LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri.KI
(EA 052, 1 )
-pur a-na be-li2-ia LUGAL KUR
(EA 056, 5 )
a-na LUGAL KUR-ti4 mi-i-ri be-li2-ni
(EA 059, 1 )
?a LUGAL KUR-ti4 mi-i-ri be-li2-ni i-na URU du-ni-ipki a?-bu-nim
(EA 059, 10 )
u3 i-nu-ma-mi ni-i-nu ?a la be-li2-ni LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri.KI
(EA 059, 12 )
u3 be-li2 DUMU a-ki-AN.IM LUGAL KUR-ti4 mi-i-ri.KI
(EA 059, 18 )
u3 LUGAL KUR-ti4 mi-i-ri i-ga-al-mi
(EA 059, 30 )
ni-i-nu-ma a-na LUGAL be-li2 LUGAL KUR-ti4 mi-i-ri
(EA 059, 43 )
KUR mi]-i-ri.KI u3 te-
(EA 062, 7 )
.ME? KUR mi?-i?-ri?.KI?
(EA 062, 8 )
UTUki lu-u2 i--mi SIG5 gab2-bu LU2.ME? KUR mi-
(EA 067, 10 )
?Page 3 of 5 ?Middle Babylonian / letter / Amarna
KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 070, 18 )
a-di KUR mi-i-ri ti-ne2-ep-?u
(EA 088, 33 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-
(EA 095, 27 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri LU2 MA?KIM2-?u
(EA 095, 32 )
i?-tu KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 097, 8 )
KUR mi-i-ri ?a-ni-tam i-nu-ma
(EA 101, 18 )
a-a ki-ma ki-ti i?-tu KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 105, 21 )
20 LU2.ME? KUR mi-lu-a 20 LU2.ME? KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 108, 67 )
42
LU2 KUR mi-i-ri u3 in4-<na>-ab-tu
(EA 109, 42 )
45
-da!-lu-na LU2.ME? KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 109, 45 )
KUR mi-i-ri u3 KUR mi-lu-a
(EA 112, 20 )
KUR mi-i-ri ?a-a ?a-ap-ra-ti
(EA 117, 13 )
-na KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 117, 49 )
a-nu-ma 2 LU2 KUR mi-i-ri ?u-nu
(EA 117, 54 )
?u-ri-ib a-na KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 122, 37 )
KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 123, 18 )
ia-nu-um LU2.ME? KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 127, 18 )
15
LU2.ME? KUR mi-i-
(EA 135, 15 )
a-na KUR.ME? mi-i-ri u3 yi-il3-qa-nu
(EA 138, 67 )
?a a-lik i?-tu KUR.ME? mi-i-ri a-na MA-<ri>-?u
(EA 138, 91 )
a?-?um gab2-bi a-ma-ta5 ?a i?-te-mi i?-tu KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 147, 69 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri]
(EA 169, 20 )
i?-tu KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 169, 22 )
ma-zi-ri i?-tu KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 169, 27 )
-na KUR mi-i-ri a-?i-ib
(EA 169, 32 )
?Page 4 of 5 ?Middle Babylonian / letter / Amarna
u3 a-na-ku iq-bu IR3 LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 197, 25 )
i-na KUR mi-i-ri u3 la-a
(EA 234, 30 )
x x x KUR mi-i-ri.KI
(EA 286, 31 )
20 LU2.ME? a-na KUR mi-i-ri.KI
(EA 289, 34 )
?u-ri-ba-ni a-na KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 296, 26 )
?a KUR mi-i-ri.KI
(EA 313, 3 )
Middle Babylonian / lexical / Amarna
-i LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri ki
(EA 351, r 19 )
?Page 5 of 5 -
While you two are at it, I'm going to continue...
We are still searching for Far3oun?s true identity, and will continue to do so until the truth of the matter is finally revealed. Untill now, we have encountered a few surprises on the road, which have made us doubt many beliefs we had thought were truths not open to discussion. So let?s continue; maybe there are more surprises waiting for us still?
- Arab Conquest of Egypt
According to the vast majority of Muslim historians, the Arabs, under the military command of Amro bin al-As, marched on Egypt for the first time, some 15 ? 20 years after Muhamad?s death ( exact date has never been pinpointed). The history books tell us that the conquest of the Nile country came shortly after the conquest of New Jerusalem ? in Palestine ? (Or the ?Daughter of Jerusalem?, as the Torah calls it).
Prominent historian and geographer Yaqoot al Hamwi (died around 1230 A.D), in his book entitled ?Mu3jam al- Buldan? (?Glossary of Countries? ? Volume 4) describes with some detail the military campaign led by Amro Ibn al-As, and relates to us the contents of several letters exchanged between Amro, and the Khalif of the time, Umar bin al-Khattab.
According to Yaqoot, the first station of the Arab march on Egypt was the town of ?3arish? (ش, which today lies on the border of Palestine and what is called the ?Sinai? peninsula, not far south west of Gaza. The Arab army camped there for a while, then moved on towards the town of Al-Farma, where the first military confrontation took place (Yaqoot tells of a battle which lasted 2 months, and which the Muslims won). Afterwards, he relates to us a crucial point in the campaign, which is when Amro?s army reached a fortified keep which he calls ?Babloun? or ?Bab-lioun?. These are Yaqoot?s exact words (Arabic readers can verify)
" ...".
He then describes to us a fierce battle, in which Amro succeeded in storming the Keep, beside which he set his tent (camp) which he called ?Al-Fustat?.
Now, read carefully what Yaqoot says about ?Al-Fustat? in page 453 of Volume 5 of his book
" ... ".
Let me translate for you
"It (the Keep) fell in Amro?s hands, and, in its place, he built Al-Fustat , which is the city of Misr today.
What Yaqoot is telling us is very clear the setting of Amro?s camp, AL-Fustat, is what became known later, in Yaqoot?s time, as the City of Misr".As such, we can deduce the following
1- That ?Misr? was originally the name given to the CITY, which stood in the exact spot where Amr?s camp (Al-Fustat) had stood some 600 years earlier.
2- The Keep that had fallen in Amr?s hand was called ?Bablioun? (This is how Yaqoot wrote it).
Yaqoot?s words are also supported by other prominent Arab historians, notably Tabari, Atabki, and Ibn Katheer, all of whom agree that what became known as ?Misr?in their time, was originally called ?Bablioun?.
Now, before you all jump at me and claim that I?m using unverified records, I will tell you that these historians got it absolutely right, and the proof is as follows
If we look for a place called ?Bablioun? (or something close to it) in the old maps of Egypt, and precisely in a spot somewhere near the Nile delta area, we find this
http//i1203.photobucket.com/albums/bb386/Gorefiendel/bablioun.png
The above is an old map from Europe, which shows the location of the Keep of Babylon, in the exact spot where the city of Cairo now lies. (In the blue circle, you can see the name magnified).
In fact, British scholar, Alfred Butler, in his book entitled ?Arab Conquest of Egypt? (pages 353 -355), says that the Keep was built in the era of Roman emperor Trajan, and was called ?Babylon ? en ? Keme? (Don?t be confused, brothers and sisters. This is Babylon, Egypt, not Babel in Mesopotamia). Does the word ?Keme? sound familiar? Does it ring a bell? Could it be that the Romans, who had conquered Egypt previously, had built a fortified Keep in the delta region, and decided to name it ?The Babylon of the Black Land?? (Remember ?Keme? is the ancient name of the Nile Valley, as it was called by the EGYPTIANS themselves, and the word means ?black land? or ?black soil?, as an indicator of its fertility).
So as you can see, we have evidence proving that the Arab historians were right on that one.
At any rate, it is clear that the word ?Misr? was NOT the original name of that keep, and that it later became ?Al-Fustat?, which was the name given to Amro bin Al-As' camp.
Now the question is How and why did the keep of ?Bablioun? (as the Arab historians called it) become known as ?Misr??
Here follows the answerYaqoot al Hamwi relates to us that the Keep of Bablioun became the CENTER of the military operations of Amro?s army, and that he then marched from it, westward towards Alexandria, which also fell into his hands with surprisingly little resistance. Once there, he sent a letter to Umar bin al-Khattab, updating him on the status of the campaign, and asking him whether he should move the center of operations to the newly conquered city on the Mediterranean coast. Umar replied ?Will there be a body of water between me and the Muslims??
Amr replied ?Yes. The Nile?
Umar ?I do not like to have water between me and the Muslims, neither in winter, nor in summer?.And so it was that Amr?s camp, Al-Fustat, became the new center for the Arab state in Egypt, gradually grew into a city, and became a second capital for the Muslim Empire. Hence, during Yaqoot al-Hamawi?s age (the Abbasid era) it became known as ?Misr?.
And now, in our modern day and age, AL-Fustat is nothing but a small district in Old Qahira (the capital of Egypt), barely the size of 4 city blocks.
The resounding truth, dear readers, is that it was many years AFTER the Arab conquest of Egypt that the word ?Misr? was introduced, for the first time, (on the maps), into Egypt. However, its introduction did not initially spread to the whole of the land. It was ONLY the city of AL-Fustat (which is now a district of Qahira) that was called ?Misr?.
But why? Why did the Arabs do that? Why did they introduce that name into the Nile country, and cause the future generations so much confusion?
Let?s read on and find out
In his book ?Lisan ul-Arab? (The Arab Tongue), Ibn Manzhour mentions the word ?misr? as a common noun, as follows (Arab readers can verify)
" "
Ibn Manzhour mentions the ?tamseer? of a place, (i.e. turning it into a ?misr?). What is he telling us? The turning of a previously insignificant land or site into a CENTER of attraction, and a destination for travelers, is referred to as ?tamseer?. Hence, this place, which was previously only an unattractive or unimportant spot in the wilderness, is turned into a ?misr?, an URBAN CENTER.
Can it be any clearer than that?
Member Huruf put it quite nicely?if you care to scroll up and read his words again.
In fact, in his book entitled "Futooh al- Buldan" ?Conquest of Countries? (Volume 2, page 33, Arab historian al-Balazhiri talks about the ?tamseer of Kufa? (turning a previously insignificant hamlet in Iraq into the ?misr? ? the URBAN CENTER - which later became known as ?Al- Kufa?. Hence, ?Al-Kufa? became the ?misr? of Iraq, just as ?Al-Fustat? had become the ?misr? of Egypt before it).
Can it be any simpler?
Every major city in the world today was established through ?tamseer? ? the turning of an insignificant plot of land into a civic center, and a destination for travelers. In the ancient days, ?tamseer? often involved building some kind of wall or enclosure around the town, so it becomes a safe haven not only for traders and their caravans, but also for adventurers and fortune-seekers, who sought shelter from the dangerous wilderness areas.
And so it was that Al-Fustat became the ?misr? - the prime destination and civic center ? of the land of Egypt, under the Arab conquest, replacing Alexandria which previously played that role.
This why, even today, when our brothers in modern Egypt want to go to Cairo (the capital), they will say "We are going to Misr". (Even though they are ALREADY in Egypt!). Why is that? It is because, deeply rooted in their memory, they knwo that somehow, the name "Misr" was associated to Old Cairo.
But the great catastrophe came later on, when this word, ?misr?, which had gradually become a proper noun (as in "THE Misr" - which effectively identified AL-Fustat) was eventually stretched to identify the ENTIRE land of ?Qibt? (Egypt), and was interpreted as the very same ?misr? that was mentioned in the Quran, as the setting for the story of Moses (P), Pharoah and the Israelites. This catastrophic delusion slowly infiltrated the beliefs of Muslims worldwide, and has been rampant for centuries untold.
Well, the time has come to rid the world of this false belief, which the archeologists now are beginning to identify for what it really is no more than a delusion. And the only divine scripture that can expose this delusion is the Quran ? the book which the Muslims have deserted and made it of no account.
So how did it happen then? How did the Muslims and the rest of the world get so confused concerning this issue?
How was the delusional connection between Egypt and the events surrounding Moses (P) and the Israelites, born in the consciousness of the masses?
This is what we will answer next.
But before we do that, let?s go back to an important sentence we said earlier ?A LIE PROPAGATED FOR POLITICAL MANIPULATION?, as we uncover a modern ?Holy Forgery? that is under execution as we speak.
- A "Holy Forgery" Under Execution
?And the time will come when our children (the ?American Indians?), will realize that they are descendants of the House of Israel, and that they are the Children of God; and then they will know the legacy of their ancestors, and rejoice in it?
(The Book of Mormon ? 1415)
What we will place before you, dear reader, is a blatant, and living example of ?Holy Forgery?, perpetrated in the name of God (?God Said So!?), which will help us better understand the forgery that was successfully passed on the Muslims after Muhamad?s time, and the residents of Arabia in general. The example that we are about to give you must have begun as a kind of joke or a comical farce, until eventually, after many centuries (and constant repetition of the LIE), it became a living, breathing, catastrophe, whose effects we are witnessing right now, as you are reading these very words.
In the year 1830 A.D, an American by the name of Joseph Smith published his ?Holy Book? which he called the ?Book of Mormon?. And this ?divine? book, as he claimed, was the result of a translation that Smith did of old glyphs carved into golden tablets which date back to the 4th Century B.C. The story, as Smith relates it, is that the tablets were buried for centuries under the earth, near his home town in the suburbs of New York City; and, had it not been for the guidance of a divine agent, an angel by the name of Mormon who appeared to him on September 21, 1823, he would never have found those tablets. The angel then inspired to Smith the meaning of the ancient hieroglyphs, and thus began the story that Smith told the American people when he published his book.
Among the ?divine truths? that the book mentions, is the story of events that took place between 600 B.C and 400 B.C (as he claims), when two groups of Jews, one from Jerusalem and another from Babylon migrated to the New Lands, which is known today as North America!!
The story of Mormon goes that the Babylonian group eventually dissipated (disapeared or became extinct) while the Israeli group survived and multiplied, until their descendants became what is known today as the "Red Indians!" It also labeled the American territory, with some biblical names to including "the land of Zion?.
No one was unable to see the golden plates that Smith allegedly translated, because the angel had recovered them from Smith?s possession - as he claimed. But this did not prevent the establishment of a new Church by Smith, which was called "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints".
http//i1203.photobucket.com/albums/bb386/Gorefiendel/Smith.jpg
A portrait of the LIAR, Joseph Smith
And the story doesn?t end here! In 1842, Smith came out to the public with a second book, no stranger than the first, which he called ?The Book of Abraham?. Joseph claimed ? again ? that he had found papyrus scrolls containing ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs , locked up inside the coffins of mummies which were on display in Kirtland, Ohio. Immediately, Smith realized the importance of his new find, as he claimed the scrolls contained writings by the hand of the Patriarch Abraham himself!! So Smith bought the scrolls, then began ?translating? them ? again with the help of a divine agent ? and they eventually became part of his second book, which contains three illustrations copied from the original scrolls.
Among those drawings, was an illustration that showed Abraham (P) lying on a sacrificial altar, in the presence of the King himself, and about to be sacrificed to the gods of Ancient Egypt!.
Now the fact is that no one could even debate with Joseph Smith concerning these outrageous allegations, because, back then, there were very few people in the world who could decipher Egyptian Hieroglyphs, and it wasn?t easy to locate or reach those few. So this gave Smith the opportunity to write pretty much whatever suited him, without any objection from anyone, and then cloak his work with the famous declaration of ?God Said So!?.
And then, it was thought that the original papyrus scrolls were lost in the famous Chicago fire of 1871, leaving only the ?Book of Abraham? and the ?Book of Mormon?, as the sole testaments of Smith?s claims. And as the years went by, the number of Americans embracing the ?Last Testament? (as they called it), continued to grow.
These people actually believe, among other things, that those two books are divine in origin, and contain the words of God. That?s it. No proof needed, because ?God Said So!?.
But then came the year 1966, which brought two big surprises for the new church.
The first surprise was the discovery of a bundle of ancient papyrus scrolls stashed deep inside the vaults of the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art. And guess what among them where the very same scrolls containing the illustrations which Smith copied into his second book.
The second surprise was that by that time, there were huge advancement in the science of archeology and ancient languages, which made it possible to translate the Egyptian hieroglyphic writings with great accuracy.
And as was expected, no sooner than the scrolls were discovered ? which Smith was claimed to have translated into English over a century earlier - that scientists began to pour over them, in an attempt to translate them. And it was then that they immediately discovered the lies, the deceptions and the forgeries that Joseph Smith perpetrated in his interpretation of the ancient text. The Book of Abraham turned out to be nothing but a collection of falsehoods written by Smith?s OWN HANDS, and attributed to God (does this sound familiar, brothers and sisters?).
http//i1203.photobucket.com/albums/bb386/Gorefiendel/Tablet.jpg
The top part shows the original scrolls, which Joseph Smith had copied into his book (the bottom part).
The original papyrus scrolls depicted the ancient rituals of burying the dead in Egypt, and mentioned some very well-known names and terms in the culture of the Nile Valley (Osiris, Horus, Set, etc?). On the other hand, the Book of Abraham completely falsified the contents of the scrolls, and mentioned names and terms that were nowhere to be found in the original copy, like ?Abraham?, ?Pharoah? and ?Angels?.
This important discovery caused a storm of objections and ridicule towards Smith?s writings, as scientists expressed their anger at the nerve shown by Smith in his forgery of the ancient Egyptian culture, and thousands of articles were written about the controversy and the great scandal.
Yet, despite all the overwhelming SCIENTIFIC PROOF that what Joseph Smith had written was no more than a collection of garbage, and that the so-called ?Red Indians? (the original inhabitants of America) had absolutely nothing to do with the ancient Israelites, the 120 years which had passed between Smith?s writing of his books and the translation done in 1966, were enough for those false ideas and dogma to spread. And now, it is estimated that the number of Mormons worldwide is close to 13 million, with some 40% of them living in the USA. Statistics and forecasting projections also show that the number of followers of this church is expected to reach over 200 million by the year 2080.
These people actually believe that the original inhabitants of the American continent, (the so-called ?Red Indians?), are descendants of Israel! Which means, technically, that the Children of Israel were the first inhabitants of America, during the bygone era of some 2600 years ago! And the only proof that these people have is ?God Said So!?.
What is the hidden agenda here? I think you?ve already figured it out, haven?t you? In case you haven?t, I?ll tell you The ultimate purpose of this LIE is that the Zionists have the right to claim America as their own, for the interests of ?God?s Chosen People?; ideologically at first, then gradually hijacking its sovereignty for their future generations to establish full control over the rich continent, all under the guise of ?God Said So!?. And the fruits of this ?holy forgery? are already starting to mature.
So what is the point of this story?
The point is to show you how LIES are perpetrated. The point is to show how EVERY SINGLE LIE that has ever corrupted our religion, had political motives behind it. You must keep this truth in mind, as you go along. The purpose of this story is to show you how the evil doctrine of ?The Promised Land? has shown tremendous success in hijacking Palestine from its rightful inhabitants, under the very nose of the international community, and with its full blessings.
And soon you will see that the LIE which claims that Egypt was the setting of the events concerning Moses (P), Pharoah, and the Israelites was not any different in its goals from the falsehoods published by Joseph Smith.
To be continued....
-
Peace -- do search on mi-i-ri in TEXTS http//oracc.museum.upenn.edu/amarna/corpus
It appears on 119 different tablets/letters as KUR (land) Misri or LUGAL KUR (king land) Misri
Middle Babylonian / administrative / Amarna
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i a-na ?E?-?u mbur-na]-bu-ra-ri-ia-a?
(EA 014, i 2 )
a-na mni-im-mu-ri-ia LUGAL mi-i-ri-i ?E?-?u
(EA 022, iv 45 )
DUMU.MI2-su2 a-na KUR mi-i-ri-i -na mni-im-mu-ri-ia
(EA 022, iv 47 )
Middle Babylonian / letter / Amarna
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-iki ?E?-ka-ma a-na ma-ri-ia ?ul-mu
(EA 001, 3 )
?a LUGAL.ME? ?a KUR mi-i-ri-
(EA 001, 51 )
i-na KUR mi--ri-i u3 i-nu-ma ta-a?-pu-ra um-ma-a
(EA 001, 52 )
u2-ul i-na-an-di-nu-na-?i ?a i-la-ku i-na KUR mi-i-ri-i
(EA 001, 68 )
a-na mni-mu-wa-ri-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-
(EA 002, 1 )
-mu--wa-re-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri--ia
(EA 003, 1 )
um-ma-a ul-tu4 pa-na DUMU.MI2 LUGAL ?a KUR mi-i-
(EA 004, 6 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i a-na m]ka-
(EA 005, 2 )
a-na mni?-mu-wa-re-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i]
(EA 006, 1 )
-ru-ri-ia LUGAL GAL ?ar3 KUR mi-i-
(EA 007, 1 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-ia qi2-
(EA 008, 2 )
a-na ni-ip-u-ur-ri-ri-ia LUGAL KUR mi-
(EA 009, 1 )
?um-ma it-ti LUGAL ?a mi-i-ri-i a-i-ia ta-at-ta-ak-ra-ma
(EA 009, 26 )
-ur-ra-re-ia LUGAL KUR mi-
(EA 010, 1 )
a-na mna-ap-u-ru-ri-a LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-
(EA 011, o 1 )
um-ma-a DUMU.MI2 LUGAL GAL i-na 5 GI? GIGIR -na ; KUR mi-i-ri-i na-?u-u2-?i
(EA 011, o 22 )
a-na KUR mi-i-ri i?-pu-ru
(EA 016, 20 )
-na UGU a-bi-ka a-na KUR mi-i-
(EA 016, 23 )
a-na mni-ib-mu-a-re-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i]
(EA 017, 1 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i)] qi-bi2-ma
(EA 018, o 1 )
mnim-mu-ri-ia LUGAL GAL LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-
(EA 019, 1 )
a-na NIN-et KUR mi-i-ri-i-im-me ul ul-te-em-ri-i ?A3-?u
(EA 019, 19 )
Page 1 of 5 ?
Middle Babylonian / letter / Amarna
-mu-u2-a-ri-ia LUGAL KUR ai-ia a-ta-ni-ia
(EA 020, 1 )
?a ?E?-ia a-na be-el-ti KUR mi-i-ri-i a-na le-ge-e u3 up-pa
(EA 020, 9 )
?a KUR mi-i-ri-i be-la-as-su2 a-na--ma u3 a-na ?E?-ia u2-up-pa-lu
(EA 020, 16 )
-lu-u2-tu i-na u4-mi ?a- KUR a-li2-gal-bat u3 KUR mi-i-ri-i
(EA 020, 17 )
iq-ta-bu-u2 i-na KUR mi-i-ri-im-ma-a-me GU?KIN el e-bi-ri ma-a-
(EA 020, 52 )
-an-ni-ma-a-me a-?e-e-ma-a-me el e-bi-ri i-na KUR mi-i-ri-ma-a-ad
(EA 020, 55 )
?E?-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-im-
(EA 020, 59 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-ia
(EA 021, 2 )
a-na mni-im-mu-ri-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i
(EA 023, 1 )
gab2-bi-i-?i-na-ma a-na KUR mi-i-ri-i
(EA 023, 14 )
a-na fte-i-e NIN KUR mi-i-
(EA 026, 1 )
LUGAL.GAL LUGAL KUR mi-i]-ri-i ?E?-ia a-ta-ni-ia ?a ;
(EA 027, 1 )
gab2-bi-i-?u-nu-ma ?a i-na KUR mi-i-ri-i a?-bu i-na IGI.ME?-?u-nu i-ta-am-ru ; u3 ALAM.ME? a-bu-ka-ma
(EA 027, 24 )
a-na mnap-ur-i-ri-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-
(EA 028, 1 )
a-na E2.ME?-ka a-na fte-i-e AMA-ka u3 KUR mi-i--i
(EA 028, 7 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?]-ia a-ta-ni-ia ?a a--am-mu-u2-u? u3 ?a i-ra-
(EA 029, 1 )
-ul iq-bi im-ma-ti-i-me-e GU?KIN.ME? ?a KUR mi-i]-ri-i i-na KUR ; a-li2-gal-bat u2-?e-em-i u3 ?a-ar-ru-um-ma
(EA 029, 49 )
-?u-nu u3 ul-te-ri-bu IR3.ME?-ia re-e-u-tu4 ?a i-na KUR mi-i-ri-i u2-?i-bu mma-
(EA 029, 169 )
a-na UGU LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri-i ?E?-ia
(EA 030, 4 )
na-a-ri-i? i-na KUR mi-i-ri-i
(EA 030, 8 )
LU2.al-zu-u-li ?a KUR mi-i-ri-i
(EA 030, 10 )
a-na LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri ?E?-ia
(EA 033, 1 )
a-na LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri a-i-ia-ma
(EA 034, 2 )
LUGAL-ri KUR mi-i-ri ?E?-ia qi2-
(EA 035, 1 )
LU2 DUMU.KIN-ka a-na UGU-ka al-ta-par2 i-na KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 035, 9 )
?Page 2 of 5 ?Middle Babylonian / letter / Amarna
i-dab-bu-bu GI?.ME?-ia ?a KUR mi-i-
(EA 035, 28 )
i-na KUR mi-i-ri mi-it u3 u2-nu-tu-
(EA 035, 31 )
-na LUGAL KUR -ia
(EA 037, 1 )
a-na LUGAL-ri KUR mi-i-ri ?E?-ia qi2-bi2-ma
(EA 038, 1 )
a-na LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri ?E?-ia
(EA 039, 1 )
u3 i-na KUR mi-i-ri KUR-ka
(EA 039, 8 )
MA?KIM2 ?a KUR mi-
(EA 040, 1 )
LUGAL KUR? URU? mi]-i-ri-iki ?E?-ia qi2-bi2-ma
(EA 041, 3 )
a-na be-li2 LUGAL KUR URU.mi-i-ri-i
(EA 044, 1 )
u3 a-na KUR mi-i-
(EA 045, 25 )
-na dUTU-?i LUGAL be-li2-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 051, o 1 )
-mur e-nu-ma mma-na-a-bi-ia LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri a-bi a-bi-ka
(EA 051, o 4 )
i?-ku-un-?u u3 ki-a-am iq-ta-bi ?a LUGAL KUR -ri
(EA 051, o 7 )
u3 a-na ?a LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 051, r 6 )
a-na LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri.KI
(EA 052, 1 )
-pur a-na be-li2-ia LUGAL KUR
(EA 056, 5 )
a-na LUGAL KUR-ti4 mi-i-ri be-li2-ni
(EA 059, 1 )
?a LUGAL KUR-ti4 mi-i-ri be-li2-ni i-na URU du-ni-ipki a?-bu-nim
(EA 059, 10 )
u3 i-nu-ma-mi ni-i-nu ?a la be-li2-ni LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri.KI
(EA 059, 12 )
u3 be-li2 DUMU a-ki-AN.IM LUGAL KUR-ti4 mi-i-ri.KI
(EA 059, 18 )
u3 LUGAL KUR-ti4 mi-i-ri i-ga-al-mi
(EA 059, 30 )
ni-i-nu-ma a-na LUGAL be-li2 LUGAL KUR-ti4 mi-i-ri
(EA 059, 43 )
KUR mi]-i-ri.KI u3 te-
(EA 062, 7 )
.ME? KUR mi?-i?-ri?.KI?
(EA 062, 8 )
UTUki lu-u2 i--mi SIG5 gab2-bu LU2.ME? KUR mi-
(EA 067, 10 )
?Page 3 of 5 ?Middle Babylonian / letter / Amarna
KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 070, 18 )
a-di KUR mi-i-ri ti-ne2-ep-?u
(EA 088, 33 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-
(EA 095, 27 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri LU2 MA?KIM2-?u
(EA 095, 32 )
i?-tu KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 097, 8 )
KUR mi-i-ri ?a-ni-tam i-nu-ma
(EA 101, 18 )
a-a ki-ma ki-ti i?-tu KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 105, 21 )
20 LU2.ME? KUR mi-lu-a 20 LU2.ME? KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 108, 67 )
42
LU2 KUR mi-i-ri u3 in4-<na>-ab-tu
(EA 109, 42 )
45
-da!-lu-na LU2.ME? KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 109, 45 )
KUR mi-i-ri u3 KUR mi-lu-a
(EA 112, 20 )
KUR mi-i-ri ?a-a ?a-ap-ra-ti
(EA 117, 13 )
-na KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 117, 49 )
a-nu-ma 2 LU2 KUR mi-i-ri ?u-nu
(EA 117, 54 )
?u-ri-ib a-na KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 122, 37 )
KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 123, 18 )
ia-nu-um LU2.ME? KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 127, 18 )
15
LU2.ME? KUR mi-i-
(EA 135, 15 )
a-na KUR.ME? mi-i-ri u3 yi-il3-qa-nu
(EA 138, 67 )
?a a-lik i?-tu KUR.ME? mi-i-ri a-na MA-<ri>-?u
(EA 138, 91 )
a?-?um gab2-bi a-ma-ta5 ?a i?-te-mi i?-tu KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 147, 69 )
LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri]
(EA 169, 20 )
i?-tu KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 169, 22 )
ma-zi-ri i?-tu KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 169, 27 )
-na KUR mi-i-ri a-?i-ib
(EA 169, 32 )
?Page 4 of 5 ?Middle Babylonian / letter / Amarna
u3 a-na-ku iq-bu IR3 LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 197, 25 )
i-na KUR mi-i-ri u3 la-a
(EA 234, 30 )
x x x KUR mi-i-ri.KI
(EA 286, 31 )
20 LU2.ME? a-na KUR mi-i-ri.KI
(EA 289, 34 )
?u-ri-ba-ni a-na KUR mi-i-ri
(EA 296, 26 )
?a KUR mi-i-ri.KI
(EA 313, 3 )
Middle Babylonian / lexical / Amarna
-i LUGAL KUR mi-i-ri ki
(EA 351, r 19 )
?Page 5 of 5Thanks Noondeplume,
First of all, I take this opportunity to say that I appreciate very much your posts in the forums and I always read them with utmost attention. I am particularly impressed with your work on inheritance, and I have taken the liberty to copy it into my files.
I also appreciate your posts in this thread. It is the greates help to have material like the one you bring up, and even if there is no agreement on the issue, at least one cannot complain that one doesn't learn something new in the process. Thanks for your effort and honesty.
I didn't doubt your word at any moment, I just stated something I had encountered, although, of course, I don't have anything against being a bit more cultured, if a can absorb that, which is questionable.
Concerning this questi?n of the name of the land now called Egypt, I still think that the appearance of the word transliterated "mi-i-" in sumerian language (I guess it is sumerian), doesn't say a thing about how the ancient Egyptians named, with a proper name, their country. Written, I suppose it would be indifferent if in hyerogliphs, since its meaning, like chinese ideograms would be independent of its pronunciation, if I haven't got it wrong. In the other Egyptian writings it should be then transliterated.
This misrsii in sumerian whould it be a sumerian root, or would it be a borrowing from some semitic word, which if so, would be related to the Arabic mSr and denote a general meaning, taken as a title.,like what I have mentioned before happens with United State of Reich?Then the other question arises, that if there was a name, a proper name to name Egypt, that had nothing to do with Egypt,or Qibt, then what made the greek or other travelers name the country with such a name?
In the bible which has come down to us, the name given to it by the hebrews is Mizraim. But it seems that it comes from one of the sons of Ham, supposedly stlled in Egypt and from that the land they called by the name of said son. That is one of the things that are said.
There would still be another question to solve. Let us assume that indeed "misrii" "mizraim" or anything like that in semitic languages, are indeed, the proper name and not a general word used instead of the proper name, from where do we get that in Arabic and int he Qur'an particularly that is also assumed? That would indeed be an assumption, because in 2.61 (as someone has already pointed out) the meaning not as a proper name of miSr but as a common noun is patent and clear and precisely it is said in the very context of Musa and its people bseeching him to give them a better life. To go from there that there it is a common name used in that context but that afterwards it becomes a proper name o a country is something that has to be proved. There is not a single case of the occurrences of miSr in the Qur'an that forces on us the only possible meaning of Egypt. Not one.
If we take the mention of the RIVERS running underneath fir3aun, then the mention takes us uniquivocally out of Egypt.
So, as far as I can see, all the Egypt in the Qur'an is in the minds of the reader and comes from previous conditioning and not from anything that is said in the Qur'an.
Salaam
-
Salam,
I am surprized that this thread still carries traction.
That "Misr" is still being debates as some area in Yemen is beyond logic. Here are some real facts to consider
- That the Quran has used the term "Pharoah", which is unique to the dynasty that ruled Egypt;
- That Jospeh was in "Misr" during the 7 year famine (which has been recorded in archeology as affecting the fertile land of Egypt);
- That the Quran speaks of "Misr" as being "lower Egypt" (decend to Egypt) and thus corrsponds to the land of the delta with its flowing rivers and its capital of Memphis;
- That the area of lower Egypt has a water source that splits into 7 rivers and that Phraoh speaks of "rivers" flowing benath them;
- That the Quran tells us the body of Phraoh will be "preserved" as a sign for all mankind - a fact that is true with many of the rulers of Egypt who were placed through the unique ritual of mumification;
- That the Quran speaks of an exodus of the children of Israel from the land of Pharoh whereby the sea was crossed - this move would rightfull put the children of israel into Arabia - where Quranic evidence supports their settelement there.
-
Salam,
I am surprized that this thread still carries traction.
Hello,
It seems you have to get used to this feeling in this topic.
- That the Quran has used the term "Pharoah", which is unique to the dynasty that ruled Egypt;
It is Fraun, more possibly a proper name like Harun, Haman...
- That Jospeh was in "Misr" during the 7 year famine (which has been recorded in archeology as affecting the fertile land of Egypt);
Do you think that fertile is unique event for some unique place?
- That the Quran speaks of "Misr" as being "lower Egypt" (decend to Egypt) and thus corrsponds to the land of the delta with its flowing rivers and its capital of Memphis;
Why do you miss Mesopotamia even talking about delta and rivers?
- That the area of lower Egypt has a water source that splits into 7 rivers and that Phraoh speaks of "rivers" flowing benath them;
Actually it is only one river...
- That the Quran tells us the body of Phraoh will be "preserved" as a sign for all mankind - a fact that is true with many of the rulers of Egypt who were placed through the unique ritual of mumification;
This is very bad observation.
- That the Quran speaks of an exodus of the children of Israel from the land of Pharoh whereby the sea was crossed - this move would rightfull put the children of israel into Arabia - where Quranic evidence supports their settelement there.
If crossing to Arabia is necessary for you, why do you miss Persian Gulf side?
-
Quote
- That the area of lower Egypt has a water source that splits into 7 rivers and that Phraoh speaks of "rivers" flowing benath them;
Actually it is only one river...
However, in Qur'aan the word river-rivers has not been used. Streams, canals has been used. For River and Sea the word used is plural ; .
-
Quote
- That the Quran speaks of an exodus of the children of Israel from the land of Pharoh whereby the sea was crossed - this move would rightfull put the children of israel into Arabia - where Quranic evidence supports their settelement there.
If crossing to Arabia is necessary for you, why do you miss Persian Gulf side?
They moved out on eastern side, Gulf of Suez, crossed it over the emerged Reef-the dried up skeloton passage, and landed by the side of At Tur, in Sinai Peninsula. This is what is stated in the Qur'aan.
-
OK, that's IT.
Time to jump foreward a little bit. I think It's time I put the nail in the coffin of this "Sea Crossing" dogma.
I would like all of you to look carefully at the map below
http//i1203.photobucket.com/albums/bb386/Gorefiendel/thumbnail-1.jpg
Now, I would like member Layth in particular, who INSISTS that they crossed the REd Sea, to considerr the following
Do you know what the average width of the Red sea is? I'll save you the trouble of looking it up. It's 200 KM. That's TWO HUNDRED KILOMETERS.
Now, to prove to you that you don't read the Quran, take a close look at thefollowing verses, paying special attention to the underlined phrases.
{And We inspired Moses "Go, with my servants, in secret. You will be followed" * So Far3oun sent gatherers to the towns * "They are but a small band." * "And they have enraged us." * "And we are all gathered and forewarned." * So, We evicted them out of gardens and springs * And treasures and an honorable station * As such, We made Bani Israel inherit it all * So they were pursued at sunrise * But when the two groups saw each other, the companions of Moses said "We are caught!" * He said "No, my Rabb is with me and He will guide me." * So We inspired to Moses "Strike forth towards the bahr with conviction." So it split into two, each side like a great cliff face * And We then brought the others (the pursuers) near * And We saved Moses and all those with him *Then We drowned the others}....
The Israelites, led by Moses (P), fled "misr" at night. This is the essence of "Isra'a". It is a secret departure from a place, without attracting attention. It t doesn't necessarily have to be at night, by the way. It could be at full noon. The important thing is that it is done in secret We are deducing that Moses' departure was at night from the context of the verses. (By the way, there are some horrendous mistakes in th FM translation).
It was not until AFTER Far3oun realized Bani Israel had left, that he began to gather searchers from the nearby towns, to make a full puruit of what he called " A SMALL BAND". Tell me something Would the great Kings of Egypt, who lived in huge palaces, with an army at the ready near them, ready to take on rival empires at any time, need to send callers to nearby towns to organize a searh party? Would Ramses, Merneptah or Imhotep, PERSONALLY take it upon themsleves to chase a small band like that? Furthermore, how the HELL could there be 600,000 Israelites? Is 600,000 considered a "small band"? Small enough that Far3oun could gather enough men to chase them on the SAME night? It is clear as the sun that Far3oun was nothing more than the small chief.
Furthermore, how far had Moses and the Israelites gone before Far3oun caught up to them? Let's think a bit The verses are saying clearly that Far3oun and his band of hunters moved faster than the Israleites, because despite the latter's head start, the pursuers were still able to gather themselves and catch up to them at dawn of the next day.
Now here comes the delicate part The Quran is telling us that the two parties reached a point where the ywere close enough to gaze upon each other {But when the two groups saw each other, the companions of Moses said "We are caught!"}
HOW THE HELL COULD THEY BE GAZING AT EACH OTHER FROM ACROSS THE RED SEA??? Would a party standing at point B (on the Arabian coast of the Red Sea) be able to see a party standing at point A, on the Egyptian side, 200 KM away?
What is wrong with you people?!!
Moses had not gone far at all when Far3oun caught up to him. There's not a chance in Hell that he could have reached the RED sea coast in ONE NIGHT!! And the two parties were almost ON each other when Far3oun drowned. So where did these events take place?
Allah commanded Moses (P) to strike forth towards "AL-Bahr" .
Who told you that "Al-Bahr" necessarily means "SEA"?? Didn't you know that the Quran speaks of teh barrier between two "bahrs", one fresh and the other salty? WHAT IS A FRESH "BAHR" I ask you? The word simply means A body of abundant water. It could be a lake, a river, a spring, a sea, or an ocean.
Furthermore, I will remind you again that Bani Israel eventually inherited everything Pharaoh had left behind. All the land around "misr" became theirs.
How can you explain the following verses?
{Moses said to his people "Seek help with Allah, and be patient; the earth is for Allah, He will inherit it to whom He pleases of His servants; and the ending will be for the righteous."* They said "We were being harmed before you came to us and since you have come to us." He said "Perhaps your Lord will destroy your enemy, and make you successors in the land, so He sees how you work?"}...
Which land did the Isrelites become SUCCESSORS OF PHAROAH in? Was it not the SAME land that Pharoah was in?
Has anyone ever heard of Bani Israel succeeding to the throne of Egypt?
When are you going to wake up from this delusion?
I am surprized that this thread still carries traction
You haven't seen anything yet.
They moved out on eastern side, Gulf of Suez, crossed it over the emerged Reef-the dried up skeloton passage, and landed by the side of At Tur, in Sinai Peninsula. This is what is stated in the Qur'aan.
Show me where in the Quran does it say that Al-Tur is in Sinai?
So you're telling me that Moses was able to reach the western border of Sinai pennisula in ONE night, and Pharoah caught up to him at dawn?
The geography is so WRONG that no matter how much you try to twist it, it just doesn't fit.
To Be Continued...
-
Mazhar
They moved out on eastern side, Gulf of Suez, crossed it over the emerged Reef-the dried up skeloton passage, and landed by the side of At Tur, in Sinai Peninsula. This is what is stated in the Qur'aan.Show me where in the Quran does it say that Al-Tur is in Sinai?
So you're telling me that Moses was able to reach the western border of Sinai pennisula in ONE night, and Pharoah caught up to him at dawn?
Allah commanded Moses (P) to strike forth towards "AL-Bahr" .
Who told you that "Al-Bahr" necessarily means "SEA"?? Didn't you know that the Quran speaks of teh barrier between two "bahrs", one fresh and the other salty? WHAT IS A FRESH "BAHR" I ask you? The word simply means A body of abundant water. It could be a lake, a river, a spring, a sea, or an ocean.
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/026.%20Ash%20Shoara/26.63.gif
Therefore/for this reason We conveyed to Musa that with your stalk emerge/make visible in the Sea/Gulf .http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/026.%20Ash%20Shoara/26.63a.gif
As a sequel it emerged/became visible, for reason each and every part was like a big bone stationed firmly at its position.Prior to it
And certainly We had communicated to Musa ,
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/020.%20Ta%20ha/20.77a.gif
that, "You/Musa travel by night with my servants;
thereupon/for reason on reaching Gulf of Suez you emerge/make visible for them/accompanying people a passage in the Gulf, the dried up .http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/020.%20Ta%20ha/20.78.gif
For reason Fir'aoun/Pharaoh physically followed their footsteps along with his troops;
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/020.%20Ta%20ha/20.78a.gif
thereby/for reason that drowned them in the Gulf of Suez what drowned them.http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/020.%20Ta%20ha/20.80c.gif
"O you the posterity of Israel! We have in the recent past delivered/rescued you from your enemy
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/020.%20Ta%20ha/20.80d.gif
and We have appointed for you a period on the right side of At-Tur ;----Now please ask NASA to scan the whole word and find another At-Tur by the side of a gulf/sea other than At Tur accross the Gulf of Suez, in Sinai.
http//www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/gulfsuez.gifIts width is not 200 km. The width runs from 12 to 27 miles (19 to 43 km).
-
Salam Pazuzu,
To disprove the Sea crossing was from Egypt, you have simply drawn a red line accross the widest point between the two land masses and stated "voila!"
Come on...get serious. I find it insulting to even be shown such an argument.
The water that seperates the land of Egypt and Arabia can be crossed either in the extreme noth "Gulf of Suez" which is is as short as 12 miles in width, or it can be crossed at the extreme south "Baab Almandib" which is 20 miles accross.
http//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/Red_Sea_topographic_map-en.jpg/470px-Red_Sea_topographic_map-en.jpg
In both cases, the Children of Israel would end up in Arabia - which is where the land that God had blessed sits.
