2020-04-04T09:35:00-13:07
In our previous conversation, after reading the history of the Al-Yahoud and the story of their book, we came to a story that could have happened in reality…and it has a high probability that it was signed by the West with Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions, which agree very closely. With a speech from readers about the book.
But the problem of accepting this story lies in the time in which it is currently taught since childhood…and it is the first fundamental problem…that can hinder understanding the subject of the story of the book found in the Qur’an. Because people believe the story of the Qur’an took place 1,400 years ago.
And we said that we must search for the authenticity of Islamic history… because there is a great possibility that history was written for us in order to remove us from reality so that we do not read the truth from the reality in which the story of the book that took place and which the readers talk about exists.
Then, after we searched for the things that reached us from the story of Mecca, and we found that they appeared to be modern, including the Qur’an, we arrived at the modernity of the Qur’an available to Muslims, relying on the scarcity of manuscripts among Muslims and the fact that the current Qur’an is as old as the modern printer.
Therefore, this modern age of the printer… agrees with the perception that we arrived at after treating the history of the Al-Yahoud, in that the Egyptian inscriptions are the book and that the story that the readers tell revolves around the modern translation of the Egyptian inscriptions, but there are those who wanted to print it for Muslims. A modern book to make him believe that it is the intended book in the Qur’an, and also to hide from the Muslim a very old book found on stone tablets.
—————————
Today we will talk about the Qur’an
The question…. If there is a scarcity of manuscripts in the region, this means that the Muslims used to memorize the Qur’an in their chests, and they must have memorized one tawqif copy.
So the logical question is: Where is the first Qur’an written by the Messenger?!
There is no divine text without its original document in which it was written… The world is not loose or chaotic… People need a realistic truth, and the Qur’an demands the book from Muslims… Al-Azhar and other religious institutions in the region have not searched since their inception. About the first Qur’an, she is busy studying the books of Al-Bukhari and Al-Tabari and the biography of Ibn Hisham.
Where is the Qur’an in which the words of Allah were first written in the current script?
The story of the Qur’an says briefly… that the Qur’an was revealed in Mecca, then the first Qur’an was written in this script without punctuation… then it was compiled during the reign of Uthman, then a process of development took place on it, due to the entry of the Persians into Islam, which They were unable to differentiate between similar letters in the drawing, and then the line was dotted, then it developed into placing diacritical marks, which is the current drawing.
This is almost a summary of the story of the Qur’an that was associated with this script… But the logical question is: Where is the first Qur’an in which the Qur’an was written in the days of the unpunctuated Messenger, or the one that was compiled during the reign of Uthman, to whom the name of this Qur’an is attributed?!
Let us provide a summary of the story of this handwriting in which the Qur’an was written.
What is the name of this line ? ….. It is said that its name is the Hijazi script
The logical question: Why is it called the Hijazi script?
Is it because the Qur’an was revealed in Mecca, and the first Qur’an was written in that region called the Hijaz, and it is the script that reached the inhabitants of the region…. Is it because the scenario of the historical story imposes a logical link between the geographical location and the name of the script?!
What I mean is: Did we call it the Hijazi script, or did the residents of Mecca call it the Hijazi…or did the residents of the region at that period call it the Hijazi?!
If the people of Mecca were the ones who gave him this name, then it is a historical fabrication and a lie.
Why ?!
Firstly… because the name Hijaz was not famous at that time. Did this word (Hijaz) appear in the Holy Qur’an or in the biography books printed by the Ottoman printer?
no
Secondly……….. The line cannot be attributed to geography, because this name imposes that the name Hijaz is a different cultural component, and the mountains of Hijaz extend to Yemen and the Levant…. Therefore, we will call it the Yemeni line or the line. Al-Shami.
But Yemen has an ancient script different from this script… and it is called the Musnad script
Thirdly……. Naming this script in reference to geography forces us to believe that society has created it in comparison with other geography, and logically, the rest of geography must have a written script, that is, there is the Najdi script, the Yemeni script, the Levantine script, and the Iraqi script.
But the script found in Yemen is not called the Yemeni script, but rather it is called the Musnad script…. This indicates that the ancient consciousness did not attribute geography to the name of the script… and the ancient consciousness was not ancient.
Fourth….. If this line was given this name by the other, then it is illogical in the consciousness of that time period, because the other used to give the lines of the region names that were not related to geography… The Musnad line was not called the Yemeni line, and The hieroglyphic script was not called the Egyptian script. The cuneiform script was not called the Levantine or Iraqi script.
So……..this name was given to this script at a later time, and its purpose, in my personal opinion, is to create an origin for this written script and for the script of the region.
But the very important question is: What did the Messenger and the Companions call this script with which they wrote this Qur’an that is in our hands?! .
Because in that time……. the inhabitants of Yemen used to call their written script the Musnad script, so what was the name that the inhabitants of Mecca used for this script?! So this script in which the Messenger wrote must have its own and well-known name. It was common in that period……..because the area surrounding Mecca had special designations for scripts.
The story of Mecca that has reached us does not refer, whether from a relative or from afar, to the name given by the Meccan community along this line… at all.
We have not received any information from the story of Mecca found in the books of biography, hadith, and other books that speaks even a small reference to the name of this script, and not mentioning it is completely illogical.
It is as if he wants to say that this line is the line of all the inhabitants of the earth, and the line of all the inhabitants of the region, and there is no need for it to have a distinct name, while the reality is that Mecca is a small spot and was surrounded on all sides by clear, prominent, and standing written lines… and This forces the residents of Mecca to give it a name to distinguish it from the rest of the scripts.
It is said that its name is the line of jaws?
I believe that it is an illogical designation, and I believe that this reason has led authors to invent this designation in order to get out of the dilemma of naming…..which is the Jazm line, on the pretext that this line emerged from the Musnad line by a process of cutting from it.
The logical question: Was it called by this name at the time or later?!
This name was invented to create a name for the font…but for a long time later, so why try to come up with a name for it when it does not have its own initial name?!
Then what is the meaning of Jazm?!
It could have been called the cutting line and the matter was over, so why this difficulty in naming… Is it for the sake of creating a special case?!
Or why is it not called Arabic calligraphy?! ..Is the topic difficult?!
I think yes, the issue is difficult, because if it is called Arabic script, it must be the origin of the first Arab script….while the reality is otherwise, there is Yemen, which is close to Mecca, and it has an older and different script, and according to history, Yemen is the origin of the Arabs. From this point that we reached, the idea emerged that this line emerged from the Musnad line.
But it is said that it is cut from the Musnad line
Question: You have the current line and the Musnad line, and make a comparison between them. Does the current line seem to have departed from the Musnad line?!
There is no relationship or any logical link between this font and the Musnad font. Even if you perform any external operations on the Musnad font, cutting, merging, splitting, or rotating the symbols, it is not possible to produce from the operations any shape similar to the letters of this font.
So what is the origin of this line?!
■ It is said that the origin of the script is Syriac.
But the logical question is: Why did the people in Mecca not accept the Syriac script as it is?! Is it because Roman times told us that the Church of Rome came before Islam, so all the elements of Islam must have come out of the Church of Rome, the white man’s church… in a sophisticated way like Darwin’s theory?!
The closest place to the inhabitants of Mecca is Yemen… very close and full of Musnad writings, and their trade goes to Yemen all the time… and the Meccan community can take the script from Yemen and write the Qur’an with it.
■ It is said that its origin is Aramaic script.
But the logical question is: Are there still people remaining today who are called Aramaeans and write in their first script so that we can compare and confirm that they actually emerged from the Aramaic script?
If I said that the current script has its origins in the Musnad script…perhaps it would be more logical than saying that the origin of the script is Aramaic, because Yemen contains many inscriptions in the Musnad script and they are very clear as sunlight. But who are these Arameans and where did they live? Do they have Antiquities such as those of Yemen, Misr, or Iraq, so that we can be confident in the existence of a long period of time in which a people called Aramaeans lived and who had their own writing?!
nothing
All the inscriptions that are said to be Aramaic are as numerous as the number of fingers on a hand, and are unclear and lacking in accuracy like the rest of the inscriptions in the region, and there is no care given to them, as if they are not authentic scripts, or as if they are like a quick, travel-friendly, and insatiable (sandwich). Three of the samples of these inscriptions contain a unique case and a strange coincidence, which is the presence of this Aramaic script next to the Greek script in three inscriptions.
So what is the origin of this line?!
This makes us ask an important question: Was this script written before Islam?!
According to the official sources studied, it speaks about 44,000 documents written before Islam in an ancient script similar to this script.
44000?! ……a very imaginative number. Perhaps the Greeks themselves or the entire Vatican Library do not contain such a volume of archaeological manuscripts.
Where are those documents?!
In addition to this information in the sources, there are ten stone inscriptions that talk about the beginnings of this script.
The archaeological history that the West has studied has provided us with approximately ten inscriptions that talk about the beginnings of the current Arabic script….. But the funny thing is that the Rosetta Stone is repeated with us in an inscription in the Levant, and it was found written in three scripts: Arabic, Syriac, and Greek…. …This inscription written in three lines is the clearest example of the current script, but what is strange is that this inscription only appeared in the Levant and did not appear in Mecca or Hijaz. Rather, the strangest thing is that this inscription is as old as the beginning of Islam.
I don’t know why the Greeks are following us everywhere in the region lol, and they place a stone inscription of three lines, including Greek, for us everywhere. Through these Greek stone inscriptions, the lines are deciphered, all the inscriptions are read, and the date that we received through the printer is confirmed.
Everywhere in the region you find an inscription consisting of three lines, including Greek.
This inscription is as old as the narration of Islam… It is as if the writer of the inscription wanted to give us a chronological document confirming the history of Islam at the same age, or to tell us that the emergence of Islam began with the appearance of this script… so that we can be reassured.
I mean, I am surprised that very clear inscriptions of the current Arabic script do not appear when they are, for example, 500 BC or 700 BC.. I do not know why there must be extreme chronological accuracy in all the discovered inscriptions so that they match the Roman calendar (the white man’s calendar) and the calendar. Hijri.
These ten inscriptions force us to ask a logical question:
If you search anywhere in Yemen, you will find countless antiquities that are not restricted to a specific number of inscriptions, and there are no restrictions on the number of inscriptions. So why is the origin of this script restricted to five inscriptions, like a sandwich… inscriptions that are travel-friendly, quick, and insatiable? ?! …… Why with the number of fingers… Where is this origin that is not restricted by conditions and a specific number? Why is the origin not an endless number of inscriptions?! .
Something illogical.
If we count these discoveries, you will find that most of them were discovered in Saudi Arabia and the Levant.
Question: Why specifically these places and not appear elsewhere?!
Is it intended to say that the origin of the script appeared there in Saudi Arabia in order to give a written origin also to that region, just as a religious origin was given to it?
Ten inscriptions, without any care, and written in a cursive manner, do not constitute scientific evidence to say that these inscriptions are the first beginnings or the first origin of the calligraphy.
Why ?!
Compare the Musnad script and the hieroglyphs….. You will find, logically and scientifically, that the hieroglyph is the first origin of the Musnad script, but look at the size of the inscriptions in Misr, they are countless, and look at the size of the inscriptions in Yemen, they are countless, and Any rational person will say that there are people in Misr who wrote in hieroglyphs over a very long life, and that there are people in Yemen who wrote in Musnad over a very long life.
Where and how long is this age until ten separate and unclear inscriptions and travel work have emerged from it, and where is this society that lived for a time writing in these scripts?!
Ten inscriptions are not considered scientifically or logically by any sane person or researcher as real evidence. Rather, in the eyes of any researcher, they are considered to be highly suspicious of the fact that someone created inscriptions for a purpose in the soul of Yaacoub.
Rather, you will notice that the time difference between the inscriptions is very small, but there is a qualitative shift in the calligraphy, and this does not indicate or express at all that this shift is the result of 40 years, and requires a longer period.
According to the history that was presented to us, near the emergence of Islam in Mecca, the people of Yemen were writing in the Musnad script on stone… and we have the inscription of Ibrahim written on the rock, and to this day no paper books have reached us in the Musnad script… so why did it not pass? The inscription of Abrahah is more than forty years old. We find the Islamic narrative telling us about a society in Mecca that writes on paper, sends paper letters, and writes on paper and leather?!
Is it possible that Yemen is an area of ancient and deep urban stability, and in communication with the outside world, as evidenced by the fact that Yemen’s Musnad inscriptions were cut from the hieroglyphic script in Misr? Is it reasonable that Yemen at that time was backward and they were the people of writing and had never written on paper, for example? The community of Mecca, which has an area of 5 kilometers, in that narrow and small place?!
Here there is an illogical interference of time.
—————————–
So how did the Prophet write the Qur’an and how did Uthman write the Qur’an?
Or what is the original script? If the narration said that the script was the invention of the Messenger or the invention of the quails of Mecca, the matter would be very logical, as it is an invention and its true origin is Mecca only and it has no previous origin.
The question: Why did they invent this line and not take the Yemeni line, unless Mecca, this very narrow place, believes politically and culturally that it does not belong to Yemen… and it is different from Yemen… and they are superior to importing a line from Yemen… She believes that if she imported a Syriac script, it would be better than importing a script from Yemen.
According to history, the first Mushaf was the Uthman Mushaf. It was compiled by Uthman and called the Uthmani Mushaf. The Qur’an was not recited at that time.
According to history, the calligraphy went through four stages, the first undotted stage, then the dotting stage (the signs of dhamma, kasra, and fatha) carried out by Abu Al-Aswad al-Du’ali, then the letters were dotted by order of the Umayyad dynasty, then the dots (damma, kasra, and dhamma) were changed to different signs. (Italics, small waw, etc.) via Al-Farahidi.
This development took place over a period of approximately 250 years
The logical question: Is it possible that this development took place over the course of 250 years, while the inscriptions presented to us by the West are separated by a very long age and no development occurred to reach this stage that Al-Farahidi reached, for example…..at least the dotting of the letters?!
Also, is it possible that a person like Abu Al-Aswad Al-Du’ali, who developed this script, instead of removing the confusion between similar letters, went to a far away place and put dots as vowels?!
Is he a donkey or a fool and a crazy person?!
Because the first logical action that any donkey or madman would do is to remove the confusion between similar letters.
Secondly… What is the reason at all for putting dots to remove the similarity between similar letters? Why did it not occur to them to invent other letters?!
Is it because the line is suspended?!
If the script had been arbitrary, they would not have made this modification to the script, and this negates the fact that it was arbitrary in their minds at that time, because they were supposed to adhere to the drawing of the Messenger as it is… without modifying the Book of Allah.
What is the origin of the calligraphy then?!
The Islamic novel that presented the Muslim tried to create evolutionary stages for the calligraphy, in order to create an initial origin for the calligraphy and historical depth, and a logical, historical development process to establish this calligraphy, just as archaeologists tried to create a historical origin for the calligraphy through ten inscriptions to give this calligraphy a chronological and historical dimension. The first principles came out of it.
Because the logical question that was not asked in this history that was presented to the Muslim and the Arab: What is the real basis upon which the letters of this script were drawn, or what is the idea that created the written letter?!
Because when you draw a calligraphy…..and then you modify the letters in documents and inscriptions and place them on the ground or in museums, a real factual history about the origin of the calligraphy is never considered at all.
In other words…when you draw a line, and then make engravings that include modifications to the line, to express the evolutionary stages of the line, historical or temporal logic is not considered realistic and natural at all.
In other words… if we discover a calligraphy as a first stage, and we cannot find any logical relationship within the shapes of the letters of the calligraphy, then after a while we discover inscriptions similar to the calligraphy… it does not mean at all that time and… Reality is the one who produced those inscriptions and those lines.
Also, the story presented to the Muslim about the development of the calligraphy is false and fabricated, because this development began with an un-dotted line, and the un-dotted line forces us to ask a logical, respectful and sane question:
On what basis were the letters drawn in this non-dotted way? Why was there a great inability and very great handicap on the part of the inventor and author of this script that prevented him from creating letters that were not similar and there were differences between them?
Was it a stupid society?!
C H F E G R Z D D D B T Th R Z T Z
Imagine it without dots
Where did the society of Mecca come from… this ass and foolish society to write in this stupid way, and to write letters that are similar in drawing and there is no difference between them even though they are different in pronunciation?!
The Meccan community is surrounded by a very respectable environment. They have a wonderful and respectable writing culture and a great historical asset, and they are supposed to benefit from them, especially since the story of the Ottomans made the people of Mecca travel to the Levant and Yemen and look at their writings.
The first real appearance of this calligraphy …….. …… a complete back, completed in this form, dotted and marked with diacritics, etc., and it reached the Muslim for the first time in this form and this dotting.
Why ?!
The line must have a primitive origin, and there must be an external logical connection that creates the forms of the line.
And if we do not find this origin and external logical link, and we find an initial origin and logical link inside the line, then it is an initial invented line, meaning that the line is originally the first, the beginning, and the end, and there is no beginning, origin, or stages of development before it.
Let’s make a comparison between this line and the datum line
You will find that the symbols of the Musnad script…each symbol is different from the other, and not similar. It has an origin found in Egyptian writing, and within its symbols there is an external link.
As for the current line
There are similar symbols inside it……. and only a point differentiates between a symbol and a symbol, and the criterion for difference is the point, and there is no logical external link between its symbols, but rather there is a logical link inside it?!
Yes, there is an internal link between its symbols….which is the audio output
Whoever invented this line invented it based on the sound output and the position of the tongue in the mouth.
I mean, for example… if you notice the symbols of the Musnad script… you will find that there is no logical connection between the drawing of the letter (d) and the drawing of the letter (dha), in the Musnad script, assuming that the West’s translations of the Musnad inscriptions are correct…. But in the current script, you will find that the drawing of the letter (d) is similar to the drawing of the letter (dha) and differs from it by only a point. And when you ask yourself why the two letters are drawn in such a close manner, you will find the answer in your tongue when pronouncing the two letters. The tongue is in a very close position.
So whoever drew the letters of this script created it based on the position of the tongue in the mouth and the sound output, and it is impossible for this mind that thought of inventing this script to draw the letter (d) and draw the letter (z) without a dot. That is, the inventor will logically invent two similar drawings for the two letters, but they must be distinguished by something else…which is the dot.
This negates, in its entirety and in detail… the story that the current calligraphy had its beginning without dotting, meaning that the first beginning of this calligraphy was in the same current form, completely ready… in a dotted form.
So the story that the calligraphy began without punctuation is a lie…to create a primitive origin for the calligraphy only in the Muslim’s consciousness, and does not make him ask a question about the first origin of this calligraphy.
Also, our discovery…that the basis through which the letters of this script were drawn is the phonetic output and the link between similar letters is the position of the tongue, makes us conclude that this script is very modern and not ancient, and that the inscriptions in which the beginnings of this script appeared are fake and forged for the sake of… The industry has a very old origin.
Why ?!
Because this basis and logical link……. is a very modern consciousness…. Because the basis on which the consciousness of the ancients drew the letters of ancient writings, was not dependent on this basis and link……… and it was His writing symbols and the way they are drawn are linked only to the shape of the things around him.
I mean, for example… the ancients used to draw the letter (n) in the same shape as something around it that begins with the sound (n)… like the shape of (nūn al-ayn)… That is, the letter (n) will be drawn in such a shape as (○). .
So… who is the first inventor of this line?!
The inventor of this font must be…a modern person, not an ancient one.
Who is he?!
The Ottomans, not the Prophet, not Othman, and not the Arabs.
If you look at the sources… you will find that most of the Arabic calligraphy was made by Ottoman calligraphers, and you will find that the first drawing of the Qur’an in this calligraphy (naskh) was drawn up by a Turk named Othman.
The Ottomans or the Ottoman calligrapher… which one of them are behind this script that they imposed on the region, after they decided to write the Qur’an in this script, and because the Qur’an was written in this script, this script later became obligatory for the Muslim and the Arab to write in it.. ..And the Muslim thought it was a arrest line.
This fact was well known to our ancestors, and they used to call it the Uthmani Qur’an, named after the Ottomans. However, this fact must not remain in memory or be passed on from generation to generation…it must be erased permanently.
Why ?
Because the continuation of this fact… will destroy the game that must be played in the region… and the continuation of this fact means that the Qur’an was originally written in a script other than this script.
Therefore….the mind of the Muslim and the Arab must be programmed that this is the first pause line of the Qur’an in order for the game to be completed.
The current script is a purely Ottoman invention, and the current Qur’an is called the Ottoman Qur’an, because the current script in which I am writing now, which is the same script as the Qur’an, is originally a purely Turkish Ottoman invention.
Realizing this fact is very important for Muslims and Arabs, so that they can understand the game and the true meaning of the Quranic verse:
{That is the Book about which there is no doubt – a guidance for the righteous}
That book… that is, the original disjointed script in which the Qur’an was written before this (connected) script…. before the Ottomans wrote the Qur’an in this script and imposed it on Muslims and Arabs.
The modernity of this writing script (Uthmanic script) supports the story that has reached us about the book, and greatly supports the modernity of the story of the book that the readers are talking about, and supports the possibility that the story is talking about translations of relatively modern Egyptian inscriptions.