But why are you not obliging me with an information which can cause you no harm?

Because if you apply wisdom you will get your answer, as of now you are an old fool who is juggling verses, no offence intended. And I am merely giving you a hint.

I had just tried to visualize your face in my imagination.

If you do not have any other worries, then I am fine, but there is I think more crucial things for you to contemplate upon, don't you find?

I have not found mention of eyebrows in the semantic domain body-parts in Qur'an.

As if you have found anything else you keep writing about.

Dear, what is the shape of your eyebrows?

Good idea, you could write another wonderful (i.e. full of wonders of logic) article on the Quran and the eyebrows, I am sure you could juggle anatomy of human head out of the verses.

Death started with Adam???
Since the context of discussion of the above was about Gospel,
There wasn't any mentioned of "Adam story" in the Gospels book (Mark Matt Luke)

Yes, death started with Adam and the spiritual narrative of the Gospels is as connected to Genesis as is the respective Quranic narratives. We spoke about archetypes and meanings behind rituals. An archetype is universal therefore I can clearly see the very same narrative in both the Genesis (and Summer-Akkadian counterparts for Adam-Eve found in ancient Babylonian literature) as well as the Gospels.

Jesus frequently used expression "son of Man" which is ben-Adam in the Hebrew Bible, or bani-Adama (children of Man/Adam) in the Quran, because it is related to the mission of Jesus and enlightenment.

It is noteworthy to know what Adam is as well, because it is not just a narrative of a "first man", but has a wider meaning connected to this name.

In fact, death is nothing more than a state of sleep and degradation, which is expressed in the creation myth and the "fall". Death is wider than a simple cesation of work of a body.

There wasn't any record of Mr Jesus explaining the "Sin / Death of Adam" that supposedly he tried to repair. Such thought developed much later, by others, after the demise of Mr Jesus...

Yes, there is, just from canonical Gospels alone, besides the gnostic coptic texts. Matthew 1811 "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.". In the Gospel of Mark 103545 this episode takes place shortly after Jesus predicts his death.

no need for additional efforts to unravel "hidden symbolism" inside.

There is always a need in looking further and amount of hidden wisdom is inexhaustible as long as one is eager to see.

• Rituals are for men and not men for rituals.

He is mentioning here particularly the Sabbath, where he does not say rituals in general, but the commandments, and in this particular case - a contemplative-unifying mechanism/force, which Sabbath or salat (as an aspect of Sabbath) is. Yet the pharisees turned it into a day off, made it a civil law, which abrogates the innate meaning, which Jesus was "breaking" due to the meaninglessness of following such secularization of this teaching. Sabbath is not a day off, as I you may guess. But one who does not keep (adher to, stand by, follow) Sabbath will taste death, which is a state of commotion and ignorance. It is notable how he calls a Son of Man "lord of the Sabbath", and his disciples could not understand what he is saying, according to the canonical Gospel' narrative.

Yet throughout the history; you will always find facts / story about human sanity in the midst of human insanity.

Of course, there will always be cases when someone from amongst the minority will do something, which is completely counter-cultural and counter-social, since the latter is driven by other factors unrelated to the consciousness and soundness, which develops on individual level, but is driven by something what is called collective consciousness, which is something manipulated by many means. Thus it is paradoxal that one who is on his journey to unified spirituality has to, paradoxically, fastfrom the world as an apocryphal saying of Jesus goes. This way he/she will make his/her own mind and not throw tomatoes in someone who was officially proclaimed as heretic.

https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

Modesty can be the best thing, as most rituals are to balance ourselves, and escape from the effects of going to extremities and accepting and respecting others too has their own freedom.

Well said sun

level of intelligence gone so low with some individuals who cant even differentiate between NEED and RITUALS...

Ritual is an an action arising from convention or habit. People are subject to needs and habits since the day of their birth and yes, everything we do is a ritual.

People speak their everyday language yet think nothing about the meaning of the words they use.

The above "explanation" from Mazhar is a plain disrespect in the name of common sense, critical thinking, philosophy and literary studies. Not only does he attract his personal limited worldview to 28-20, which by the way states nothing about arrogance, which is what a narciss per definition is, it is personal arrogance and solipsism, but it speaks about delusion/cover; he actually makes two distinguishable erreneous conclusions

1. His explanation of 28-20 contradicts 234, when a methaphisical created is termed as kafiruun, whereas the former verses speak of ordinary human beings. Now when I bring this up look him trying to solve this, he will say it has to do with "rejection" on his side for this reason he is termed like this. So, is he a disbeliever, an arrogant narcisstic persona, or a rejector?

If Iblis is a disbeliever - that does not make sense, he gives an oath to God and speaks in a quite respectful manner to him;

If Iblis is a rejector - well, yes, he refused to bow to Adam, but how is this sort of rejection relate to 28-20?

If Iblis is arrogant - again, in the beginning of Baqara it states that their hearts are sealed, meaning they have no choice believing or disbelieving in God, or their condition is flawed to an extent they cannot see obvious processes happening in their lives (something I notice among inhabitants of this forum as well); therefore arrogance or narcissism is nowhere defined explicitly at least in 28-20.

By the way, there is nothing mystical in the Quran according to Mazhar's earlier conclusion, so therefore 234 should not even bother him altogether.

2. He said

Muhammad Sal'lallaa'hoalaih'wa'salam

If something demands to call himself like this, with exalted titles and mantras, that is he who is an arrogant narciss, which is everything we know about Mahomet.

So again, we clearly see contradictory and dualistic views of Mazhar. If something is culturally accepted, for instance, that the Kings of Ancient Egypt were "bad", fine, let's make up a diatribe "proving" their psychological disorder (as if hundreds of other kings can't be measured with such); but if something in his culture is regarded as "good", let us say 'salallaahoalaih wasalam' after his name.

Now, substitute Firun and Mahomet and there we go, in a parralel universe Mazhar would write the very same diatribes proving that Mahomet was a narcisstic persona and Firun alallaahoalaih wasalam was God's messenger...

And what is the difference between Salallaahoalaih wasalam and Firun?

1. Both were rulers, meaning they had a personal army;

2. Both were rulers and therefore had slaves;

3. Both probably led a very excessive lifestyle in regards to power, faith and sexual pleasures, because that's what culturally comes to mind when we speak of Pharaoh's and that's what is known from the ahadith literature about Mahomet (read below what I think about this first);

4. Both were rulers and were higher standing in social hierarchy;

5. Both were murdering people, including unarmed folk, including contract murdering or murder per order;

6. Both were arrogant and demanded special treatment towards their 'divine' persona.

Except that we know nothing about the Biblical and Quranic Firun as a historical persona outside of Biblical and Quranic narratives, which make it an archetype and not a historical figure as I alreday told; and the facts about Mahomet are contradictory and have authenticity issue (like anything in history). But, if we only measure them by the Qur'an, for instance, then what is the point of saying salallaahoalaih wasalam after someone who is not even mentioned in there?

Quran says nothing about a person called Mahomet, and these 4 words allegedly attributed to him (out of more 6400+ verses in the whole book) do not even explain a context about him, and clearly mean a different thing, not a person.

I know what 'muhammad' in the Quran refers to. But people being subject to their own flaws and degraded worldview do not let alone require answers.

And in the context of his discourse he by the way mentions

A critical reader will find
as if he himself is unsure whether his explanation is "critical" enough so that he tries to impose his view by stating that only "critical minded individuals like I am" will understand it.

What is secular forms of symbolism?

A secular form of a symbol or a symbolized ritual is just what it is - secular opposes mystical understanding of inner philosophy which lies within the symol.

Secularization of a meaning means institutionalization of a meaning into a form of human-created institution, which then works to exercise governmental, religious or other 'mechanical' purposes and formal means as opposite of a meaning bearing universal descriptive message, which is conveyed though many forms of messages, such as folklore, textual data, allegories and metaphors, signs and symbols.

Rule of thumb is that the symbol is archetypal meaning it does not change with eras, regimes, or under other circumstances. They can be interpreted differently, but an archetype still possesses its innate qualities, something which anthropology and semiotics study to uncover (innate meaning of a sign).

Example zakat as a way to purify your soul by contemplation, good thoughts and good deeds - found everywhere, Bible, Christianity, Daoism/Taoism, Islam. This is a mystical representation of a Golden Rule, i.e. do to others (and the world) as you would wish others (and the world) do to you.

Secular representation of zakat as per Sunni faith a 2.5 % protection tax so that you can sleep well at night so that the thugs would not confiscate your property or put other sanctions on you.

In other words, secularism implies deprivation of inner meaning of certain processes, phenomena, meanings or events into something practiced on the 'outer', materialistic level as opposite to 'inner' and spiritual. And if you do not like term 'spiritual', you can say inner representation, occult (hidden) or universal, since the universe is subject to universal laws governing it and these laws never write themselves down and are not "revealed" through the book, but yet they manifest in every possible way to make others know they are working.

When certain ideas that are meant as occult and are distributed though metaphors, allegories, signs and symbols become secularized they lose their innate meaning and become meaningless. As such, people dwell into meaningless rituals which serve little to no purpose but yet hide within themselves an inner wisdom, which lies on the level of spiritual/occult, something not sensed by five senses, but can be sensed once you see events occurring in your life.

There is no such thing as 'religious' or 'secular' because a man is by its nature religious and is governed by religion. Religion per its definition means a set of rules governing a body (human, institution, law of nature et cetera). Since we are programmed to sleep and be awake, this is religion. Religion is not subject to certain systems of belief, since believe is everywhere including materialistic forms of worship, such as a-theism, which is also based on faith on every level of life. An example of atheistic belief a belief that "everything there IS, is what I see, there is no hidden processes and everything can be measured empirically". Well, they shat their pants when the double split experiment was conducted. And now they go great lengths trying to justify that this experiment is somehow intact with their castrated worldview.

But when something becomes as I put it 'secularized' then a form of representation of certain information simply gets its representation on the outer level as opposite to the inner level on which the conveyed information was initially thought to be represented. A great example is literal translation of the Biblical Old Testament or the Quran, which loses its innate meaning and makes no sense whatsoever. It is crazy to think how many Quranic concepts are misunderstood and that quranism is in fact a cancer of the mind, a veil so to speak, a harem, in which a veil is their psyche covered under delusion of literalism, i.e. literal understanding of occult/inner/hidden information. Luckily, the Quran has left several hints on how to understand it, one being its formulas, the other is reference to other mystical tradition all over its pages. You will not understand the Quran without understanding the Gospel of Thomas, and vise versa.

In such a case Quran becomes a mambojambo, a set of hearsay and unrelated verses, where the innate idea are covered by misuse of language as well as literal understanding of the text. When you see people write "quran-based" articles here simply look at their arguments and "verse juggling" to know what I am talking about. It pretty much abrogates the very focus of a book which is meant as allegory and was never meant to be "clear" as they put it.

A textual information is also a symbol conveyed by the means of a system of signs i.e. letter. In fact letters posses not only vowels and sounds but also numerical value which keeps a lot of inner symbolism within the letters and words.

Sometimes a seemingly ?non-sensical? inscription may hide within itself a formula for salvation.

Everything is a symbol actually. There is nothing in this world, which would not carry a symbol within it, from a full grown tree to growing grass, to sleep and awareness. Everything has inner symbol and tells a lot about who we are and what is our future destination.

Good carbo exercise...

Exercises do not require religious background, but the very movements they perform during salat can say a lot to someone who knows and can understand the symbol.

To feed the clergymen....

Zakat means purity afterall. Does it make someone pure if they buy clergymen a car or a mule or allow the latter not to work and live a parasitic lifestyle? I do not see purity, I see slavery.

Aim and throw practices... also a good carbo exercises...

There is nothing about aiming since there is no specific aim installed on the wall, therefore it does not matter how you throw it. The idea of throwing stones comes from formula "shaytanu rajiimm" meaning "Satan accursed". But looking down at specific linguistic details unveils the secret, of what the word stone "hajara" stands for and how to implement it in your personal life. What does it mean to stone the devil basically? It means a lot to someone who knows and feels its real effect. Throwing stone at the wall does not do the trick, fortunately or unfortunately.

I don't get any 'hidden' symbolism on the story above..

This requires "third eye" training (not related to the deluded new age concept). And if this topic is interesting to you may dwell more deeply into comparative religion.

90% of the gospels told the story about Jesus living and only 10% told the story about "Jesus dying / tortured".
But due to the popularity of death cult in middle east during that time, and excessive obsession about death, people tend to put more focus on "The Death of Jesus".

Death started with Adam already, and is very clearly represented actually. But of course people imagine a couple hiding their body parts from angry man and running away and then being barred from eating from the second tree.

Then introduce the next evolutionary stage for the sacrifice rituals..
Instead of spending money to buy lambs to feed the poor.. why not spending money into collective funds for student scholarship.
Explain, logically, the benefits and the potential impact of such ritual...

I would logically explain that we do not own anything in the first place and only use resources as guests, therefore we have no moral right to take more, to take excessive amount of human, animal and estate capital into our possession. In the Quran this sort of excess is called riba, which again is mistranslated as "giving loans". But the word means excess. Now tell it to Saudi or people loving good life but who call themselves muslims nonetheless. Islamic banks are no better than classical "loan-based" banks, they still aim at the same concept of accumulating money from profit and hierarchal distribution.

It is also important to note that you are not given limits of excess, nowhere in the Quran or the Gospel, although the Gospels emphasize on being poor is better than being rich. But there is nowhere written a limit of what excess is or otherwise defined, same as with majority of other concepts, thus the concept becomes complex to grasp. On the contrary, things like twelve tribes or seven heavens are given an exact amount of BUT they are painfully misunderstood. Twelve tribes become actual clans to the profane, which despite the lack of any evidence still keep millions of people believing into their historic existence; and the Seven Heavens become actual seven layers of atmosphere, which we know is not true based on observable facts. That is because the word and conveyed information itself is highly symbolic and require analysis of the Self in the first place. And how does one know if he/she lives in excess or not? By exercising the knowledge of the unified reality, awareness of unity and exercising compassion. Without understanding the unity one will dwell into solipsism, and without feeling compassion towards suffering of others one becomes a psychopath who is unable to feel misery of others and therefore lacks instruments which would allow him to analyze his reality as opposite to others.

Now one other thing worthy of note is that the knowledge or awareness is not given from the beginning of human life and is meant to be acquired in the process of development. As such, world itself at its current state is but a ground of purification/purgatory and is meant to be cruel, unjust and tortuous, because crucial information is hidden from the beginning and is also kept hidden by the possessors of knowledge, i.e. the clergy, who are interested in keeping people in slavery. But the very moment one becomes 'awaken' one starts exercising his thoughts, emotions and actions into a better perspective thus 'programming' his experience into better, i.e. the Golden Rule, unless of course he does not transgress the limits and does not break the rule after becoming acquainted with it. The latter is possible and we can see super successful individuals and orders who manipulate people as the flock of sheep by using the psycho-social mechanism of mind control. They themselves have knowledge or a part of higher knowledge of cause and effect at least, but do not share it, because that's not what they want. They do not want a generation of sincere, standalone and mindful individuals, that does not benefit them. They need a flock of slaves which chooses between a "complex dilemma" of entering a slaughterhouse either from the left or the right side. They need a poor Chinese worker solving a complex dilemma on whether to hang himself after or before the lunch. Indeed, a complex question to ponder upon...

Economic reformations and evolution will not solve the problem as long as one nation or a cartel of nations live excessively exploiting the 'third world' of poverty and cheap labor. This is also the rule of balance, order and chaos. If there is an abundance of something in one place, there is poverty and lack on the other side.

Agree..
Ironically.. it was the 'satanic cults' who often claimed / posed as "God" / "Angel" and accuse those who dare to question their dogma as "Servant of Satan". I observed such pattern also exist in this forum.

Most churches willingly or unwillingly actually serve 'Satan' despite proclaiming "words of Christ". That is why it is important to study human psychology and anatomy. Even the fact that eyes create an upside down image due to their curvature means quite a bit as to how we should perceive this world and differentiate between real and illusory. So called fake Christians say the follow the Christ yet run in first rows to serve Uncle Sam. Muslims differ no better.

Today when they will push the button, a lot of idiots both local and on the NATO/international levels will run mindlessly with arms killing each other as the flock runs in the slaughterhouse, choosing between right or left door to the slaughterhouse as it somehow makes them a real difference, because they haven't analyzed the situation they are subject to in the first place.

Salama

I wish you would abide in selam as well, not duality. But I guess selam is also a meaningless word for you, which is "clear" and not "mystic", correct?

Advice was sincere. Do visit a psychiatrist. Tell him what name you chose for appearance on internet. Also show him some scripts of your writing. He will quickly diagnose the problem and start rehabilitation work.

Is that all you could respond? Is that what your age long intellectual capacity did develop into? Is this your Rabb's final form? Or are you still evolving? Perhaps you should write another worthless diatribe on Quran and psychological issues in accordance with the Quran? I would gladly write another review )

You have some psychological problem and some delusions. Better consult a psychiatrist. First tell him what you perceive from Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

What is my psychological problem and where am I deluded? Perhaps it is you who should consult a psychologist to find out the root cause of your mindless tractates which is nothing but a worthless diatribe, which you claim to be "historical" or "scientific" work.

I already gave you a definition of narcisstic behavior. It is plain and simple, an incapability of showing mercy and feeling empathy towards suffering of other human beings, which an archonic (based on hierarchy and control) ruler by definition is, as opposite to the leader, who suffers the same scenario as people who trust their lives to him.

Your dualism and deception prevent you from understanding it. This is why you keep parroting random verses you have no understanding of.

Why? Because you were decieved, was lost in your spiritual guidance, got dissapointed with mainstream Islam, but since you still needed a spiritual guidance you entered the book-worship bandwagon. I give you hints that the book you deem as "absolutely clear" is in fac the answer to your suffering and stupidity. But since it is obvious how illogical you sound, means you did not grasp the meaning of the book, your delusion does not cease. Start with basmallh, and think why it appears at the beggining of the chapters. But you will probably ignore my words.

Narcissists Personality Disorder does not mean and refer every ruler. Just first study it in some psychology book.

Oh yes it does. Anyone who is capable of ruling others by force is narcissistic and a psychopath, who per definition is incapable of empathy towards suffering of other humans. Since you have a veil over your mind and a slave mentality you still dualistically divide "bad" and "good" rulers. If you could understand the Quran you wouldn't.

The problem of many people, a disaster, is dualism, which is a form of shirk, like it or not. But the longer you abide in your castrated worldview and deception the longer it will take for you to realize what is the core problem of your thinking and useless tractates which bear no historical or religious purpose and are a product of mindless verse juggling, made of combining random verses, which are not contextually consistent, and using own flawed logic to impose a meaning on such a mixture.

I actually had to split his non-sense in few halves. This is becoming ridiculous.

Thereat, despite deliverance most of them after having seen it (Qurn) have purposely abstained adhering it. Thereby, they people persistently listen not.

Look at definition of kafara when you get time, and then look at the mirror.

It is a fact it (Qurn) is certainly the relay of the exalted Messenger

Nothing about a Qur'an in in. You inject words on a freely basis, eh?

Another type of texts, difficult to interpret at the time of narration and writing, are statements of soothsayers - prognosticators. Qurn is easy to interpret because it is not a discourse narrated by a soothsayer - prognosticator

O really? Interpret me 901, make it an easy interpretation.

No..instead, he simply parrots verses because it tells him

And neither it (Qurn) is an Oral and written expression of a soothsayer - prognosticator.

Yet little is that you people try self retaining and comprehending it.

Indeed it (Grand Qurn) is certainly a conclusive verbal statement characteristically elaborate, organized, differentiating and delineating, contrasting and isolating each element rendering it crystal clear.

The verse has nothing of what you just listed.

Grand Qurn illustrates in a unique way by the choice of such words whereby it produces images and describes events as if they were happening in front of the reader. Its vivid descriptions portray image in such manner as if it were being displayed in a live recording. The reader feels watching the past and future events visually.

You do not know what are you talking about.

But certain people for reason are debarred even understanding the surface meanings of the text.

Yes, they think it is a historical book, and do not even understand the definition let alone a purpose of the Quran. Poor folk.

A man with a little common sense and IQ would realize that Qur'aan is a non-fiction book. Nothing symbolical and mystical.

Really? What's the point of 351, 234? Come on, one short answer from you for both verses - it should be scientific, clear and not a mystical.

Qur?n is an explicit elucidation for the peoples at large.

There is nothing "explicit elucidation for the people at large" in that verse. Not to mention you got the definition of the Qur'an wrong.

This (Grand Qur?n) is a delivered-transmitted conclusive proclamation for the Mankind. The purpose is that they might get warned-admonished-awakened by it.

So why don't you wake up already and write non-sensical stuff instead?

Qualitatively, it (Qur?n) is guarantor-conveyor of glad tidings and revivalist-Warner-awakener. .

Does your deluded world understand what the "glad tidings" is?

Why not you rebut the evidence quated that the person mentioned by title Fir'aoun was a real king of Egypt who is portrayed in hieroglyphics exactly as depicted in Qur'aan?

Rebut what? The fact that someone called himself Firun like Russian kings called themselves as Tza'rz? Or English feudals called themselves Kings? Or feudal lords called themselves lords of the manor? What is there to rebut? You haven't constructed a consistent thesis, in fact you have castrated the global message of the book.

Why not you rebut the evidence that proves him Narcissistic Personality Disorder after reading what exactly is it.

And why don't you use a bigger picture which the Quran calls you to do? There is no him in singular as it talks about the archetype and not a specific persona in history. Anyone who believes his self-rightous values and hierarchy and power allow him to control other does have Narcissistic Personality Disorder, including the Mahomet, who you probably being a lesser being would praise happen you live near him. Or would you?

The unique point of his reign is mentioned. For people who use intellect, it suffices to identify him in history.

Seriously? Is this what you call intellect and reasoning? Because all famous rulers in history of Egypt, Rome, Mesopotamia were ALL famous for building better palaces and or "wonders" than any counterparts, ancestors or competitors. Simply saying someone was a "a very prolific builder" just because of a single verse is a non-sense, lack of insight and ignoring reasoning, whereas EVERY rulers from Summerian Kings to Genghis Khan were interested in building the best palace or a wonder so as to leave a historic and architectural heritage named after them.

And then he says

The major chunk of the text of Qur'aan are Narratives. And narratives are mentioned to take lessons from the past. Narrative writing is distinct from other types of texts. When reading, narratives you need to be aware how they are written which will help you comprehending them.

Compare your reasoning in the past two posts

1. "a very prolific builder" beacuse of a single verse ;

2. Quran is built out of narratives.

Narratives are meant to be taken as a whole and not your quranist way of juddling verses and summarizing them in a common text.

I am not your enemy, I only want to make you look more deeply into this and perhaps then you can find a better Quran.

The major chunk of the text of Qur'aan are Narratives. And narratives are mentioned to take lessons from the past. Narrative writing is distinct from other types of texts. When reading, narratives you need to be aware how they are written which will help you comprehending them.

Exactly. Who would argue with that? Now add because that's what the narratives and allegories are filled with and it becomes eternal, and not of a particular time period. When you juggle with verses in order to find a particular scientific and/or historical context, which it lacks, because the book is highly symbolical and mystical, you pretty much abrogate the point of archetypal narratives.

Why have you not mentioned this

Fir'aoun enjoyed the reputation of a prolific builder because of Ha'maan

Oh yes I did mention lofty tower in case you did not read it, use Ctrl F if you have problems with quick check.

How does this small verse out of 6400+ verses in the book somehow define Firun as a historical figure who as you say was "a very prolific builder"? Then you move unto other unrelated to the context verses and so and so on.

What a waste of time.

You seem to have missed it

Classical Lexicons mentioned its Root as .

(

That it signifies greatness, dignity, eminence and to become haughty, arrogant, proud, tyrannical, show one's strength and power; to tyrannize.

None of the definitions among the is in anyway contradicting head, authority, exhalted, power, because that's what defines power and authorities. You would bow your head to Mahomet I am quite sure about that had you a chance to meet him in person, and his name can be translated as "Praised", which is another way for "Exalted".

Secondly, 4-lettered definition is not a root. Semitic parental roots stem from 2 and 3 lettered roots. 4lettered "roots" are simply definition to particular words and do not constitute a "root definition" i.e. etymology.

Regardless, your reasoning is still defective since you read the Quran as if it somehow is a book of historical records and not the teaching of ayats .

How does it feel writing worthless tractates which have no historical or religious purpose outside of vanity?

Firun is not a proper noun of a particular king, it is an archetype of power and authorities. Any one who claims authority over another soul is a narcissistic personality by definition.

Also, your root definition is worthless since you use a textual example available in Lane but not the root definition itself, which is Fa-Ra-Ayn head, authority, exhalted, power.

Greek has the same word spelling as "Pha-Re-Sees", meaning "authorities", and in Aramaic

Obviously there is not a mention of Musa, since the latter is an archetype just like Firun, and not a historical personality. Musa means Messiah or Moschiachu in Hebrew, Masihu in Quran, it is a synonym for messiah, meaning enlightenenment.

Seriously... look at his arguments

Yet another cue for his identification as Ramesses II is his depiction in ancient history as a very prolific builder. The closest of men around him was Hamaan, the man who had labour force and was chief of constructing buildings.

Here we have a problem of research based on hypothesis that Ramesses II and his depiction in ancient history as a very prolific builder.

Now let us see his evidence

And so that Our Majesty may provide for them a Land to reside - does not at all even hint at the hypothesis or relation to it;

And that Our Majesty may cause, for Fir'aoun (Pharaoh) and Ha'maan and troops of both to watch some of that about which they were apprehensively cautious. - does not at all even hint at the hypothesis or relation to it;

Know it; Our Majesty had sent Ms with Our unprecedented signs and distinct authority, argument and logic, - does not at all even hint at the hypothesis or relation to it;

Towards Fir'aoun (Pharaoh) and Haa'maan and Qa'roon does not at all even hint at the hypothesis or relation to it;

Thereupon they said, "He is an illusionist hoaxer liar". - does not at all even hint at the hypothesis or relation to it.

As is evident it is a number of random verses, taken from random parts of the book without being even contextually coherent. One verse is from 286, another springs from 4023 and 4024, the tactic which is consistent with the rest of his "analysis" and that is an common 'Quranist' way to interpret the Quran.

Fir'aoun enjoyed the reputation of a prolific builder because of Ha'maan

• now we have the next hypothesis.

His evidence

And Fir'aoun (Pharaoh) said, "O you the Chieftains! I have not known for you people any iela'aha godhead who is other than me.

• not only do we see a complete lack of consistency with the raised hypothesis, but we also observe random scattered verses as they somehow constitute or relate to the same story. One argument stems from verses 2623-29, and a very verse in context is a third verse unrelated contextually to two others.

Therefore, you kindle for me fire, O Haa'maan, upon clay/bricks where after render for me a lofty tower so that I may diligently obtain get information about the iela'aha the God of Ms; Though, of course, I certainly consider him one of the liars."

This verse is taken completely out of its context and by some magical means which is only understood by the author of the article and perhaps Zakir Naik, is now connected with 4036-37, as these two even relate.

Seriously, you guys should be working at the Ministry of Truth, where such sort of citation acrobatics might be valuable.