Osama Al-Saadawi – What is the importance of talking about him?

Osama Al-Saadawi - What is the importance of talking about him?

1/21/20210:00:00

Link to the article

When we decided to talk about the topic of an introduction to deciphering ancient writings in the region, the main goal of this topic was to create a foundation, even if simple, for sound and correct cultural awareness about something realistic that exists in our homelands about which we do not have sound scientific awareness.

Because it makes sense… Since our land contains these ancient writings, we are supposed to know more about them than anyone else who is not from our land, while the matter is completely inverted. The West knows more about these writings than us. In fact, we are almost almost illiterate in understanding these writings. We don’t have any culture around it, we just repeat everything the West says.

This is the reason we entered this topic.

We have seen that our discussion of this topic requires us to talk about an example from our reality that deserves to be viewed and studied due to its importance, because this example was taking place in the same circle as that approach and it attempted to formulate a new approach based on its cognitive tools and free from Western methods and tools.

This example is the Egyptian researcher Osama Al-Saadawi (may Allah have mercy on him).

This researcher’s research was largely ignored and was met with ridicule by some, and the reason is because he says that the West’s translation of Egyptian inscriptions is fake and that hieroglyphs are writing books containing religious texts and Quranic lines, and that the kings of Misr are nothing but the prophets mentioned in the Qur’an.

It is true that there are researchers who entered this field for the purpose of rereading history, but they did not enter the door through which Al-Saadawi entered, and this is the reason why we chose him, because he is the first Egyptian, and even the first Arab, who decided to re-translate ancient writings, and with this step he is the first researcher to go. He went to the root of the problem and started from scratch, as he is considered the first Egyptian and Arab researcher to address the subject of ancient writings in the region in a scientific and realistic manner and to get rid of the methods of the Western occupier. He was the first to open a door for researchers to enter the real world of Misr, or to create a platform on which During which we work to rebuild history. He contributed to closing the magic gate that the West opened to the world from Misr.

Not only that, but he was able to find some scientific tools that he relied on in formulating a methodology, thus becoming the first researcher to depart from Western methods and realize the source of the problem.

Our conversation about this example will not be a personal conversation……. Whoever wants to see his personal biography, it is available on a website run by his son (Ismail), who is also a researcher like his father in this same field at the following link:

http://egyptology.tutatuta.com/operations/main.htm

Our talk about Osama Al-Saadawi will be about his approach, and because the matter requires a scientific symposium that includes researchers to discuss his research, which took him a long time, so we will summarize the matter in a few points and will not talk about the details or his translations, but rather the general framework of his research.

We will not talk about his translations or the correct aspects that we see, but rather we will talk about the mistakes he made from our point of view, and this does not negate his research at all. Osama Al-Saadawi, may Allah have mercy on him.

The importance of this thing, because there is a rising awareness that has become aware of the extent of the falsity of the West’s translations of Egyptian inscriptions, and this awareness has become in need of reading research and opinions that speak contrary to the West’s methods, and therefore the first research that can encounter this awareness is the research of Osama Al-Saadawi.

————————

Among the mistakes of Osama Al-Saadawi

1- The first mistake (Rosetta Stone)

– He believes that the Rosetta Stone is real.

But a fake stone made in France and Britain

He tried to translate the hieroglyphic text.

While the text is fabricated and fake, it is not correct to translate fabricated text.

Can you translate this text and understand its meaning (btg sannam khajjaj khawwa)?

Of course you cannot, even though you can pronounce the letters correctly, and even though they are written in Arabic letters, they have no meaning.

This is the meaning of the sacred text, and the reason for preventing writing with it so that it is not said that it is from the ancient Egyptian who wrote texts in an understandable language. A fake stone can be made, and even if you read the writing correctly, you will read unreal foreign sounds.

– He believes that the hieroglyphic text written in the Rosetta Stone is essentially “good news” or a spiritual prophecy that speaks about a great, sacred figure who will come in the future to resurrect, renew, and confirm the ancient Egyptian religion.

While we believe it is a fake stone.

We also see that the term ancient Egyptian religion does not exist, and the Egyptian today is an extension of that nature. Islam.

– There is no name (Ptolemy) mentioned in the hieroglyphic text. Also, there is no (p) tone in the ancient Egyptian language. It is a pure Latin tone and there is nothing similar to it in hieroglyphic signs. They tried to suggest to us that (Ptolemy) is the real name of this Greek king… and they said that this is the pronunciation of the name as stated in The cartouche written on the Rosetta Stone… But, gentlemen, the real names of the Greek kings are as follows… and that is as stated in the first appendix… page 202… from the book: [Misr… from Alexander the Great to the Arab Conquest… by author H. Idris Bell.. Translated by Dr. Abdul Latif Ali]

Soter >> Ptolemy I!!

Philadelphus >> Ptolemy II!!

Euergetes >> Ptolemy III!!

Philopato >> Ptolemy IV!!

Epiphanes >> Ptolemy V!!

Philometor >> Ptolemy VI!!

We believe that his words are correct, as the name Ptolemy is not found in the circular frames of the cartouches, but he was not successful in some of his reasoning.

For example:

* It will be indicated that the phonetic value p does not exist in the ancient Egyptian language and is a Latin tone. This is a valid inference.

* He infers that the Greek kings were not named Ptolemy, relying on a reference by a Western author who talks about Misr from Alexander until the conquest.

This is an absolutely incorrect inference, because first, it is based on a Western reference that talks about Misr, and it is supposed to be based on its archive. Secondly, how can we be sure that there is a history of Greece in Misr when there is no Egyptian archive to confirm that history? Thirdly, even if we believe in this date found in the reference, it does not prevent anyone from convincing you that Ptolemy is a general designation for any king in proclamation.

* He believes in the existence of Greek history in Misr, and that the stone was written during the reign of Greece in Misr.

While we believe that the history of Greece in Misr is fictitious

* He believes that the cartouche contains (sacred religious phrases)…and they are not names….and every religious phrase inside the cartouche expresses a specific idea or a specific principle that the king believes in. Therefore, he chooses this phrase as his royal slogan during his coronation.

This principle was followed by all the kings of ancient Misr, even those foreign kings who invaded Misr and occupied its land. They were given phrases that they chose themselves to indicate the period of their accession to the throne.

He was right that the cartouches do not contain the name of a person and are religious phrases, but he was not successful in saying that all of them are not names, but rather they may contain the name of a person and those cartouches are news and are not royal emblems according to the idea that the West implanted in its translations that they are royal frames that contain Names of kings.

* He says that the audio values of the cartridge in Rosetta Stone are:

The monophonic structure of this phrase is:

(F – T – Wa – Bar – M – E – S – Lm) – Fatah – Meri

If we write the name alphabetically, according to the Champollion method, we get the following name:

(Fatwabar-e-Islam – Fatah – Death)

What is the relationship of this phrase to the name (Ptolemy)?!!

He is correct in what he says, as these are according to Champollion’s rules

* He says…. Champollion’s basic assumption that the cartouche contains the name of the king, and that the cartouche has a counterpart in the Demotic script or the Greek script of the Rosetta Stone, is a completely wrong assumption, which destroys Champollion’s theory from its roots.

His words are very true and undermine the foundation of the Champollion game from this stone.

He cites words by a Canadian professor who mocks Champollion’s work, although we believe that reason and logic are supposed to impose themselves in confirming any work, but there is nothing wrong with his quoting a professor’s words to emphasize the corruption of Champollion’s translations so as not to say that the matter is not worthy.

………………

Professor Avery Wilson from Canada in an open letter on air:

From Avery Wilson on December 20, 1999:

Hello everyone… Champollion did not discover the relationship between the name and the cartridge. This relationship has been hypothesized by Mr. A. Cester in the sixteenth century… and Champollion continued based on this source. The method used by him is a continuation of what Young (a British Egyptologist) accomplished…and it is a very flawed and faulty method. There are many examples to prove this, but I will start with simple ones.

First, let us assume that the cartridge idea is correct. By comparing the cartouches in the upper (hieroglyphic) text and equating them with the approximate locations of the names (Ptolemy) and (Cleopatra) in the lower Greek text, he compared the phonetic values of the Greek letters with what is assumed from the hieroglyphic signs inside the cartouche.

But what he actually found is that the Ptolemy cartouche contains more hieroglyphic signs than its Greek counterpart, whether literally or tonally. This leaves empty phonetic values in the hieroglyphs.

The same thing applies to the name (Cleopatra). But instead of assuming that the hieroglyphic signs had independent tones – meaning that the Egyptian tones did not correspond to the Greek tones – he immediately suggested that what was written inside the cartouche was (Ptolemy) in the Greek pronunciation. In fact, he was comparing a Greek name with another Greek name without trying to make the hieroglyphic signs relate to the national Egyptian tones. In addition, he forced her to conform without letting her reveal her true self.

In order to be fair, he should have noticed and realized that the transmission of tones and signs is not homogeneous or identical

He had to look for another way

But he didn’t do it

Rather, he continued on the same wrong path, using the name (Cleopatra) as his next achievement. What is strange is that he did not get the name (Cleopatra) from the Rosetta Stone, but rather from the Banki Obelisk? . Even here the cartouche does not equal the number of elements in the Greek text. There were abandoned or neglected items..

Instead of admitting that the transfer was wrong, he began to create reasons or excuses to justify it

This consequently led to complexity and accumulation of errors from the beginning

As this continued, the situation increased from bad to worse due to the introduction of the idea of literal comparison. This is the reason why this work today has led to confusion in deciphering the unknown hieroglyphic signs and also the reason for multiple readings or interpretations of the known signs. His theory of literal comparison between the two languages should have continued in the same way…or in other words…if you started in this way, you would have inevitably continued it. You must follow the code..and if it does not work, you should try changing the code. But he didn’t.

The phrase has been translated:

CGPLTSU Review

to :

Hello..sky blue termite foot spray

This is not a joke. This is exactly what Champollion did

Signature: Avri

……………

* He translates the hieroglyphic text in the cartouche and says:

If we return again to analyzing the contents of this cartridge… without going into complex linguistic details that are not of interest to the reader…

We find that it contains a very famous ancient Egyptian phrase that refers to many of the Pharaonic kings of Misr

Throughout the history of the dynastic eras and even before the dynastic times, this phrase is:

(Fath Marri) which means (So follow the religion of Ibrahim, upright, and he was not of the polytheists)

Egyptologists translated it as (Ptah Meri)… or (Fattah Meren)… and they said that its meaning is (beloved of the Allah Ptah)!!

What do we understand from this religious phrase? Is it the name of a king, as they say…or is it an integral part of the religious text written in hieroglyphics on the Rosetta Stone? This is a definitive confirmation that Alexander the Great embraced the religion of Amun… which is the same religion as Ibrahim… and that all his followers among the Ptolemaic kings were of the same religion as our master Ibrahim, peace be upon him… and it is also the religion that was prevalent among the Egyptians at that time!

Thus, we conclude conclusively… from this cartridge… that the Egyptians during the reign

The Ptolemaic (Greek)… (330 – 50 BC)… They were Hanafi

And in the religion of our master Ibrahim, peace be upon him..

As they always were during all the eras of Pharaonic Misr..

And before that, for many millennia of ancient history…this is a very important matter

……………..

He is right that the Egyptians follow the religion of Ibrahim, and he is right to undermine the story of the Allah Ptah.

But the strange thing is that he has undermined Champollion’s translation approach from its foundations, but at the same time he believes in Western translations, Western terminology, and Western stories, but he interprets those translations with different meanings.

We believe that there was no Ptolemaic era in Greece in Misr, so that the Egyptians were believed to be of the religion of Ibrahim, and there was no dynastic history in Misr, but rather it is a term invented by the occupying West, and there was no character named Alexander in the first place so that Alexander would follow the religion The religion of Ibrahim.

Rather, what is strange is that he believes that the religion of Amun is the religion of Ibrahim, even though he is supposed to believe that people follow the religion of Ibrahim and the story of the religion of Amun was invented by the occupying West to erase the memory of the Egyptian person after Napoleon’s occupation of Misr.

2 – The second error (Egyptian language):

He says

……………

The Egyptian language, like any other language, is divided into two parts:

First – spoken language.

Second – written language.

First..the spoken Egyptian language

The spoken Egyptian language is a homogeneous mixture of classical Arabic and the popular, colloquial language that is widespread on the tongues of all sects of the Egyptian people, with minimal oral changes between the governorates of Misr or from one geographical region to another within Misr. This mixture, or what we should call it… the Egyptian tongue. It is the spoken Egyptian language that has not changed or changed one iota from the ancient times of pre-dynastic Misr (more than 7000 years BC) until today..

The first global and historically unprecedented statement by Dr. Osama Al-Saadawi about his theory at the Guardian International Egyptology Forum in April 1999 was:

The spoken Egyptian language has not changed a single letter from the ancient pre-dynastic times until today

Meaning that Egyptians now speak just as their ancient Egyptian ancestors spoke

Dr. Osama Al-Saadawi explained that this statement did not come out of emotion or haste. Rather, it came after serious, scientific linguistic research that lasted nearly 25 years, in which he used dozens of historical and linguistic references, most of the dictionaries of the ancient Egyptian language, dictionaries of hieroglyphic signs, and major Egyptology references. He proved Dr. Osama Al-Saadawi, all of this in more than one research and more than one book..

If we consult one of the international hieroglyphic dictionaries, such as the comprehensive hieroglyphic dictionary of the genius Egyptologist Wallis Budge, we will find that there are thousands of words written in hieroglyphic signs that have an Egyptian or Arabic pronunciation that is completely similar to what we pronounce today in the Egyptian tongue.

One of the researchers, Dr. Osama Al-Saadawi, asked the following question: “Why was the Islamic conquest not responsible for the Egyptians acquiring their Arabic dialect?”

Dr. Osama Al-Saadawi’s answer was as follows:

“Before I answer this question, allow me to ask you in turn: Do the British people speak the American language, or do the American people speak the English language? Who is ahead of who in terms of civilization and history?!

Then, did you teach your mother to speak the Egyptian language, or was it your mother who taught you to speak it? And who comes first in time, you or your mother?!!

Think a little and there is no doubt that your answer to these two questions will provide the answer to your question.

The Palermo Stone dates the events of Egyptian civilization up to 13,000 years before the Dynastic Era, when there was not a single living creature in the barren desert land of Hejaz (the Empty Quarter)… Archeology has discovered hundreds of thousands of important human and cultural monuments in the heart of and Upper Misr, dating back more than Since 7000 years BC, nothing of scientific or cultural value has been discovered in the land of Hijaz that belongs to those ancient times!!

As for the linguistic aspect, we have dense pyramid texts recorded around 5000 years BC, and there is no equivalent in any region of the world. The pyramid texts are subject to strict linguistic rules. If you read the actual words of the pyramid texts, you will find that there are thousands of words. Ancient Egyptian, which we still say now with the same pronunciation and without any significant change… whether classical Arabic or popular colloquial Arabic…

Even if we believe the historical stories that the Egyptian people learned in modern schools, we find that they say that the ancient Egyptians were the ones who taught the Arabs of Hijaz how to speak and even how to pronounce words.. An example of this is that our master Ismail, peace be upon him, was the one who taught the people of Hijaz the Arabic language and its grammar.. and our master Ismail He learned the Arabic language from the tongue of his mother, Mrs. Hajar the Egyptian, according to what the circulating historical sources tell us.. So how could the Arabs of Hijaz have taught the Egyptians to pronounce Arabic after they entered Misr in 640 AD?!!

This means very simply that the ancient Egyptians spoke classical Arabic thousands of years before the Arabs of Hijaz… and even before the emergence of the Hebrew (Jewish) language, ancient Greek, Coptic, or Latin…”

Secondly: the written Egyptian language

We note that the Egyptian language script or letter passed through three main stages of time before settling to its current state

These stages are summarized as follows:

1 – The period from the pre-dynastic era until 390 AD:

It is the stage of the calligraphy or hieroglyphic letter (the language of the statement), which was officially used in Pharaonic Misr for long historical periods, from ancient pre-dynastic times until the end of the fourth century AD. We note that the hieroglyphic signs that make up the ancient Egyptian language enjoyed amazing stability throughout these eras, for example:

This means that the oral pronunciation of the ancient Egyptian language was extremely stable over thousands of years until the end of the fourth century AD. As we noted in the proof of the spoken language of the ancient Egyptian language at the beginning of the lecture, this spoken word has not changed one iota until now.

2 – The period from 390 AD – 640 AD:

At this stage, several attempts were made to develop the hieroglyphic script into hieratic and then into modern demotic. These scripts were contemporary with the hieroglyphic script but were popularly used outside of religious texts. However, these lines were not settled into a final form, but attempts were constantly being made to improve and develop them.

We also note that Misr was under Roman occupation in this era, which continued for a long time. A parallel attempt was made to replace the three Egyptian letters, hieroglyphics, hieratic, and demotic, with the Greek letter. However, this attempt failed miserably because the European Latin sounds did not match the Semitic Egyptian sounds.

This attempt was named after the Coptic language, which lacked all the elements of a correct language, so it died in its infancy. We will explain that in a separate section. This attempt ended completely with the Arabic calligraphy replacing the previous ones. We also note that the Egyptian people were isolated from these official attempts to change the writing script, and that their spoken phonetic language did not change one iota, which we still speak in it, whether classical Arabic or colloquial Arabic.

Third period

This is the period in which the Arabic script, derived directly from hieroglyphic signs and with the same phonetic tones, prevailed, but became a pure alphabet instead of the combined hieroglyphic script. Arabic calligraphy then borrowed hieroglyphic diacritics such as fatha, dhamma, and kasra, ending up with the glorified Arabic calligraphy that we use now.

We also note for the third time that the oral pronunciation of the Egyptian language also did not change during this period of time, which is a continuation of the pronunciation of the Egyptian language in all its historical stages, whether classical or popular Arabic.

When I began to explain my theory and discuss it with the world’s scholars on the Internet, one of the scholars said: Your theory is illogical because you pronounce the hieroglyphic words with an Arabic tone. I told him: You may be right because I also noticed that English people speak the American language. He responded immediately, saying: No, it is the American people who speak English because English civilization precedes American civilization by two thousand years.

I said to him: Did Egyptian civilization not precede Arab civilization by at least ten thousand years? Here, this scientist was astonished and could not continue the discussion. Another scientist intervened and said to him: Don’t you know that there are more than ten thousand Egyptian-Pharaonic words that were entered into the dictionaries of the modern Arabic language without the slightest change or distortion, and that this is the only thing that could be counted? This was also stated by the famous Egyptologist (James Henry Breasted)

Thus, gentlemen, we find that the ancient Egyptian language, with its Arabic and popular pronunciation, is the actual basis for most of the Eastern languages, including the (Jewish) Hebrew language. From here also comes the validity of the first statement in Osama Al-Saadawi’s theory, which states:

The Egyptian language has not changed a single letter orally since pre-dynastic times until the present day.

Meaning that we speak exactly as our ancient Egyptian ancestors used to speak

……………….

We believe that there are many errors in his words:

The ancient Egyptian language is not only the language of the current Egyptians, but rather it is the language of the first man on earth and it is the language of all Arabic speakers in the region, because all people left Misr, and the dialects and accents of current Misr are mutating due to many factors, including the occupation, which introduced many vocabulary. For the tongue, it is not the spoken language of the ancient language. There must have been a first standard language before the dialects and accents that existed in Misr… The standard language is the tongue of the Qur’an.

Meaning that the ancient Egyptian spoke in the same language as the Qur’an, and the language of the Qur’an is the tongue of ancient man in Misr.

There were no Islamic conquests until the story of Arabization in Misr, which the West always presents in its research and to groups associated with the West, was denied, because history was written by the West to establish Mecca and hide the Qur’an written in Misr.

The Hebrew language is very modern, and it is a language designed by Western scholars. A religious book similar to the Qur’an was written in it to create a religion that penetrates the religion of the first man in Misr.

The hieroglyphic script is not only an Egyptian script, but it is the first written script on Earth and it is the script with which the first human wrote, and there was no human in all the Earth except in Misr and all people emerged from that script.

The demotic and hieroglyphic script are not Egyptian scripts at all, for the simple reason that they are scripts in which there is no care in writing and not all of their symbols have an origin in the symbols of the previous hieroglyphic script, and because they are written in papyri only, and we did not find them written on stones, while we find the symbols of the Musnad script. In Yemen, it is identical to the symbols of the hieroglyphic script, and there is great care in writing and it is written on stone tablets.

3 – Third error (Coptic language)

Osama Al-Saadawi says

……………….

The Copts of Misr speak the Egyptian language, whether colloquial or classical Arabic, which is the same spoken language of the people of Misr in all eras, including the ancient Pharaonic era. They speak the popular Egyptian language, whether in their private gatherings or among themselves in the streets and public squares or in institutions, institutes, etc.

Some people try to portray that there is a language different from the language of the people of Misr that the Egyptians spoke before the Arabs conquered Misr. They said that it is the Coptic language that was prevalent in ancient Misr and that it is close to the Greek language. They said that the entire people of Misr, in all their cities, villages, hamlets, and villages, switched from speaking the so-called Coptic language to the Arabic language in less than two years (640-642 AD)… This is something that only raises ridicule and only indicates extreme ignorance of those who make these alleged statements. They also said that this alleged language is still used in some Coptic churches, trying to suggest that it is the spoken language that the people of Misr spoke before the year 640 AD.

These sayings have aroused the appetite of some linguists in the world to study this wondrous language, which suddenly died of a heart attack on the tongues of the entire Egyptian people… their Copts… and in the entire land of Misr!! Linguists know that living languages never die. The Egyptian language is the most alive and vibrant language on earth, and from it most of the world’s current languages were born, including the Latin languages. We will explain this in other chapters. Thus, many linguists came to the land of Misr to listen to it in the aforementioned churches.

Here, gentlemen, is the testimony of one of the prominent scholars that was broadcast live:

They always told us that the Coptic language is the last contact with the ancient Egyptian language and that some Copts still speak it in their churches. This prompted me to come myself and listen to them. However, I only heard some vague and ambiguous murmurs and chants that are a mixture of the language. Colloquial Egyptian, ancient Greek, classical Arabic… murmurs and other meaningless words, but they are sounds that arouse mystery and curiosity among common and simple listeners.

This is the testimony of an independent American linguist in which he tells us that the so-called Coptic language is nothing but a mixture of vague and ambiguous murmurs with which some people try to delude the common and simple people into thinking that it is actually a language other than the one spoken by the ancient Egyptian people!!!!

In one of my lectures on the ancient Egyptian language, a distinguished Coptic woman asked me about the Coptic language, so I asked her:

> In what language do you speak to your husband while you are in bed in the middle of the night?

> She answered: We speak Arabic!

> I said: Rather, you speak the Egyptian language… which is the same language that was spoken by the Copts of Misr… hundreds of years before the Arabs conquered Misr… and without any change or difference.

>Then I asked her: What is your husband’s name? She said: His name is Aziz.

> I said to her: Is Aziz a Coptic name? She said: Of course it is a Coptic name and has been inherited for hundreds of years.

> I told her: But Aziz is a pure Arabic name and it means the rare lover!

> Then I asked her: Are you familiar with the letters of the Coptic language? Do you know their source?

> She said: Of course I know the letters of the Coptic language, and their source is the ancient Greek letters with some additions.

> I said to her: Would you allow me to write the word “Aziz” in Coptic letters? ..So I wrote it!

> I told her: But the pronunciation of the name you just wrote is (Azeez)… not Aziz!

> She said: I know that.. but there is no letter (A) in the Coptic language!!

> I told her: How is it that the Coptic language lacks the letter “ayn” (A) while some say that the Egyptian people spoke the Coptic language…and the Egyptian language is full of thousands of words that contain the letter “ayn”?

>Then I asked her: What is your son’s name? .. She said: Awad. I said: Would you allow us to write it in Coptic letters?

>She said: I think it’s the same problem! .. I said: There is also the Egyptian letter dād, which has no equal in the Coptic language. Therefore, the name Awad is written in the Coptic language.. (Awd)… It is a severely distorted pronunciation and has no connection to the Egyptian language.

> She said: I think you are right.. and the matter requires further research.. I told her: Thank you very much.

So what is the story of the Coptic language?

1 – The time period in which the Coptic language occurred:

The Coptic language occurred in the period from the year 390 AD… until the Arabs entered Misr in the year 640 AD… which is the period in which an attempt was made to replace the letters of ancient Egyptian writing… of various types… with the letters of the Greek alphabet.

2- Definition of the Coptic language:

It is an attempt to replace the Egyptian alphabet with the Greek alphabet. This attempt has nothing to do with the actual oral pronunciation of the popular Egyptian language. This attempt came after the Roman colonizers established themselves in Misr after a very long period of occupation that amounted to more than 1000 years… starting in the year 330 BC. AD..and until the year 640 AD.

Anton Zekry, the famous Coptic linguist, says in his well-known book (The Key to the Ancient Egyptian Language), under the title (The Coptic Language and its Writing), p. 120:

(In the year 389 AD, Emperor Theodosius forbade the pagan Egyptian religion and the temples were closed in implementation of his order. The Orthodox religion became the official religion of the government… and thus the hieroglyphic and demotic writing were completely abolished… and they borrowed the Greek alphabet and added to it seven letters from the Egyptian language in the demotic script. Because there is nothing similar phonetically in the Greek alphabet.)

And this is how, gentlemen, this nascent mixture, which has no Egyptian basis, was known in the Coptic language, which the Egyptian people vehemently refused to use in their popular writings due to its extreme abnormality, primitiveness, and ignorance of it, which led to the spread of illiteracy in writing and reading in an epidemic manner among the masses of the people. Egyptian at that time.

As Antoun Zikri says, p. 124:

((Many Greek words were integrated into the Coptic language because most of the Coptic books were translated from Greek, so it was easy for them to transfer the Greek words into their language.. It was also easy for them in the beginning to transfer the Greek alphabet… and the Copts did not find many conventions in their original language. To express the new ideas that Christianity introduced into their beliefs… The Greek language was widely spread in the land of Misr at the beginning of the emergence of the Christian religion… and the Copts still express it in some of their religious rituals in the Greek language.)

This, gentlemen, is the testimony of an expert in the Coptic language from the Egyptian Copts, and he explains to us very clearly how the Coptic language and the Greek language are two sides of the same coin.

Accordingly, we can define the Coptic language as:

The Greek language spoken among the Greek community in Misr

And some Egyptians mixed with them

It has nothing to do with the Egyptian popular language prevailing throughout all Egyptian lands

3 – Letters of the Coptic alphabet: The Coptic language contains 32 letters:

It consists of 25 Greek letters of the alphabet. 7 alphabet letters of unknown origin were added. They were said to be Demotic letters! Gentlemen, here are the 32 letters that were said to represent the ancient Egyptian language. I leave the comment to you:

alpha-beta-gamma-delta-epsilon (son)-zeta-ita-theta-iota-kappa-lambda-miu-miu-niu-exi-omicron-pai-rho-sigma (back) – tau-hehou-yopsilon-fai-ki-epsi-omega:

It is pronounced as follows: Alpha – Beta – Gamma – Delta – Epsilon (Su) – Zeta – Eta – Theta – Iota (Iota) – Kappa – Lambda (Lula) – Mi – Ni – Xay – Omicron (O) – Pi – Rho – sigma (sima) – tau (tav) – heho (heh) eupsilon – fi – kai (ki) – epsai – omega (oo).

Then seven letters:

shai – fai – khai – hori – guanga – tshima – ti

Shai – Fai – Khai – Hori – Jinja – Uchima – Te

Do these tones, gentlemen, have any connection to the tones of Egyptian words?

We note, gentlemen, that the letters of the Coptic language include the following serious defects:

It does not contain the distinctive letters of the ancient Egyptian language that are mentioned in all hieroglyphic references and whose authenticity is agreed upon by all Egyptologists, which are:

(A H Q D)… one of the most important features of the ancient Egyptian language.. which has no equal in the Coptic language.

As an example: How do we write in the (Coptic) language the following (Coptic) nouns:

Dear

When I confronted a Coptic linguist in a public debate and asked him to write these names in Coptic letters, he failed miserably! For a very simple reason, which is that he did not find Coptic letters corresponding to these letters!! He even failed to write the word “Coptic” itself, which surprised everyone present!

How do we write the name of a person whose name is (Coptic) and whose language does not contain the tone (Q)?

2 – There are repeated letters in the Coptic language that have no meaning.

Thus, gentlemen, we see very clearly through the clear phonetic comparisons of the alphabets of the ancient Egyptian languages (hieroglyphics) and Coptic that there is not the slightest relationship between them… Rather, it was an attempt to erase the Egyptian language from its roots and replace it with a European language under different names.

…………

His words are very correct and his inferences are very logical based on concrete factual evidence, and his final conclusion is correct and based on a scientific basis, which is, “The Coptic language and the Greek language are two sides of the same coin.”

The blind, ignorant person who has not studied languages will know that Coptic is a purely Greek language.

But he made a mistake in understanding the context of this language, its history in Misr, and the reasons for its presence in Misr.

There was also no Roman occupation so that it is believed that the Coptic language appeared as a result of Roman attempts… because the Coptic language is very new to Misr and is of the same age and status as the Hebrew language. Coptic did not appear in Misr until after Napoleon’s invasion. It is a purely Greek language in which a book was written. The Bible, which the West believes in, is a religion for people who cannot even speak its language.

In short… Christianity, Copticism, and the Coptic calendar. All of the above did not appear in Misr until after Napoleon’s invasion.

And research the reality to be sure

The first church was built in Misr during the era of Al-Albani

The first Coptic calendar appeared during the era of Al-Albani

The first reform of the Coptic language occurred during the era of Al-Albani

4 – Fourth error (reading words in hieroglyphs)

He believes that most Egyptian hieroglyphic texts are written from right to left, like the Arabic language. This is approximately 96%. Only about 4% of these texts are written from left to right, like the English language. This fact is clearly evident in the Pyramid Texts. They are more… The Egyptian texts are dense…then the texts of the Book of the Dead…the texts of the Palermo Stone, the texts of the Rosetta Stone, the texts of tombs, temples, shrouds, coffins, obelisks, and other dozens of texts recorded in all ancient Egyptian circles.

We believe that this is completely untrue, because a culture writes from right to left at a rate of 96%. It is a society that has a well-established culture in which no abnormalities can occur in the direction of writing, and the state of this society does not need the appearance of a coincidence of 4% to be the direction of writing. From left to right… especially because this coincidence only occurred in the most important hieroglyphic texts written in the pyramids and so-called temples.

5 – Fifth line (sun symbol)

He says :

………

“Egyptologists said that the sign of the sun inside the cartouche means and symbolizes the Allah Ra… They also considered it an integral part of the king’s name. But all of that is a grave mistake and just speculation that is not based on any scientific basis, just like most of what Egyptologists have announced in the field of the ancient Egyptian language.” It is just a guess that is not based on any scientific basis, which has led to the distortion and falsification of the history of Pharaonic Misr throughout its era in a way that has become difficult to repair and requires a long time, especially with the insistence on spreading lies about Pharaonic Misr in all media outlets because the truth conflicts with the interests of many institutions that You profit morally and financially from continuing to spread these lies.

The word (Ra) is an abbreviation for the phrase (Allah of the Worlds)… We have explained that before. The phonetic value of the sun sign is (yum) from (yum) and is used in words such as (the Most Merciful) or (mi) as in (the two worlds). Since we have explained that the royal cartouche is in fact a Qur’anic text chosen by the king to express the period of his rule, the meaning of the sun sign that is placed on top of the cartouche is:

(In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful)

Accordingly, the sign of the sun is not included in the pronunciation of the text of the cartouche, but rather it is an initiation into the name of Allah. ”

………

We believe that this is incorrect, as he maintained Champollion’s translation (Ra) and all he did was interpret the word, and make it an abbreviation for the phrase (Allah of the Worlds).

Because the symbol is not a symbol of the sun at all, and it is never read (Ra), but rather (look).

6 – The sixth mistake (the prophets)

He says that the so-called kings of Misr are nothing but prophets, and that the Sphinx is a symbol of the Prophet Ibrahim.

He is right in what he says. Most of the coffins in Misr belong to prophets, and those tombs in Misr belong to prophets, and one of those tombs belonged to Sulaiman, whom the Qur’an’s speech talks about, but he made some mistakes:

The Sphinx (Maqam-Ibrahim) is called a symbol of the Prophet Ibrahim, and we believe that it is not a symbol, but rather the place of Ibrahim, next to the first house established for people.

In his research, he makes the same mistake with which he inferred that Coptic is not the language of ancient Misr.. He wrote some of his research in English, and it includes a translation of the names of kings in Misr into English in the same way as in the Bible book.

Because the question is, if we replaced Coptic with English and asked her: Can you write the name “ابراهيم” in Latin letters?

The answer will be yes….. Ibrahim

Not Abraham, according to what he writes in English.

Names are not translated….. For example, my friend’s name is (Issa) and his name is written in the passport in Latin (Issa), not jesus according to what Osama Al-Saadawi wrote.

Sulaiman is not Solomon and should have been written by Sulaiman

And

Youssef is not joseph and should have been written by Youssef

And

Dawoud is not David and should have been written by Dawoud

And

Maryam is not Mary, and should have been written as Maryam

————————————

These are the mistakes he made, from our point of view, which do not negate his research at all.

If we investigate these mistakes that he made, we will find that their main cause is the historical context of the problem, because we believe that awareness of the real historical context of the problem (language, writing, religion) would have made him go as far as possible in his research, while he had a hypothetical historical context for the problem. These errors caused.

We hope that his son (Ismail) will continue on this path and never stop at his father’s research. That is, the son must complement the father in his work, even if errors appear in some of his father’s research, he must correct them and then build again on top of his father’s project.

Because the topic is simple and brief….. The Holy Qur’an was written in Misr, and Napoleon decided to invade Misr for the benefit of a European project, which was to forge Egyptian writing. In order to create a new Islam for Muslims in which the Qur’an will be revealed in Mecca, and to create religions that carry the Book of the Bible in order to penetrate the Muslim and make him believe that they are religions from Allah.

Pre-Napoleonic history is a fake.

اترك تعليق