2019-08-26T13:03:00-07:00
Why did ancient history not know a king or any man named Ramesses?!
In the beginning……I will give you a simple summary about the history of Ramesses, which came from the writings of the West
————————————
Ramesses I, Pharaoh of Misr, was a military leader who ruled Misr from 1292 – 1290 BC.
Misr flourished during his reign… and reached the height of its cultural and military development. The descendants of Ramesses I ruled Misr, the last of whom was Ramesses XI.
Ramses received a number of names and titles, including the king of Lower and Lower Misr, and the name associated with the Allah Horus, king of the earth.
Ramesses was a deputy in the army during the reign of King Horemheb, and he was called Baramsu….. He was not of a royal lineage, but rather of an ancient military family. When he reached fifty years of age, he became king, and he called himself Rameses, which means (born of Ra).
When Ramesses ascended the throne of Misr, he worked to establish the worship of the Allah Amun. After the collapse of the religious revolution led by Akhenaten, who called for the worship of the Aten (the sun) as one Allah, Ramesses abolished the worship of the Aten.
excitement
Ramesses was interested in building temples and his palace, but unfortunately no traces of his works remain for us, except for his tomb in which he was buried………and the Book of Doors, part of the Book of the Dead, was found in his tomb.
Ramses was buried in the Valley of the Kings cemetery, and his body was discovered by Giovanni Battista, which contains the coffin of the kings, and is decorated with drawings of him, in the presence of the gods……..Osiris, Ptah, and Anubis. What was found in the contents of the tomb is in the British Museum.
The mummy of Ramses was stolen… and sold to a Turkish merchant, and smuggled to North America via James Douglas in 1860 AD. It was displayed in a museum in Canada, then an American man bought it, and finally it returned to Misr with great celebration.
————————–
We are not trying to write a new history now, but we are only thinking about history, and thinking is the method we follow while reading history.
If we think carefully about that history that was written… we will find ourselves asking logical and realistic observations and questions:
■ A family that ruled Misr for 250 years…….and all its kings were named Ramesses.
Ramesses, son of Ramesses, son of Ramesses, son of Ramesses, son of Ramesses, etc.
■ Is it possible… that during his reign, Misr reached the height of its cultural and military power, and that he did not leave us any urban traces of his palaces, only a cemetery and temples?! .
The monuments in Misr are countless and have been around for thousands of years.
Why have the traces of this king disappeared, and only a cemetery and a temple remain?!
■ Why do strange names appear all at once in a period of time and then disappear… as if there is a cultural and linguistic separation between each era and another… that makes the names of kings different from the previous names and not There is a similarity.
I mean, it doesn’t make sense for one culture to have no kings with similar names for 1000 years, as if the names belonged to different time cultures.
I mean, if there was a king named (Abdullah) 1000 years ago in the culture of a place…it is logical that another king named (Abdullah) would appear over the course of 1000 years, because the name (Abdullah) is a name at the heart of the culture of society. .
But in the case of the chart of the names of the kings of Misr, you find that the matter does not seem realistic.
You find, for example… the name Rameses does not appear until the year 1250 BC, and this name lasts for only 250 years, but it did not appear before that year… and this name does not appear after 1000 BC either.
It is as if there is a binding natural cultural and linguistic law that prevents the repeated appearance of this name throughout the history of Misr.
This makes us realize that this plan was not written by a natural reality, but rather by an awareness of a certain law and order.
■ You do not find any local culture in Misr bearing this name (Ramesses), and there is no word in the culture or language that can be derived from this name and is still in circulation in Misr.
■ I also think that it is difficult to imagine a king writing his name in a holy place.
Because in the ancient world, religion and belief were a deep cultural state, and the king was part of this culture, and was not in control of that state, and this means that the authority of religion will be stronger than the authority of the king, and not the other way around… especially since the inscriptions Misr considered writing sacred, and holiness prevented a king from writing his name in a temple, and this was a place reserved for religion only.
I mean, it is illogical…. Imagine that people in ancient times would have considered a place containing the name of a king a place of worship. If the inscriptions in the temples contained the names of gods, we would say that the topic might be logical, but the name of a king was found to be illogical.
■ But the most important logical observation that makes us absolutely certain that Rameses is a made-up character that was not a real reality… is the name of Rameses himself.
how ?
If you notice the name Rameses, you will find that the name’s combination is a Greek combination.
The name Rameses consists of two syllables (Raames – Yes).
This syllable (yes) is a syllable that we only find in the Greek world.
Rameses
Ceramis
Eccles
Antonis
It is true that according to Western translations, they add this passage to the names that the West extracted from Egyptian inscriptions, because those names were mentioned in the books of ancient Greece. They are restricted to Greek names.
For example, there
Osiris…and his name that the Egyptians had was (Osir) (wsir), but the West called him (Osiris), because he was mentioned in Greek books.
That is, in the Greek dialect, they used to add this syllable to names, similar to the case of some cultures that add a phonetic syllable to the end of a name
Like the name (Muhammad)… some people pronounce it (Mammadov).
But this phonetic syllable (Yasin)… is present in the structure of this king’s name, and is not a product of the Greek name given to him.
The king is not Greek, but Egyptian
How did he choose this Greek formula for naming himself?!
It is impossible for a person in the past to have chosen this phonetic combination for his name, in a time when the Greek world did not yet exist.
It is impossible for a person to choose that phonetic combination for his name from a different culture. He must choose a name for him from his culture.
So this name………… is an invention from a culture different from the culture of Misr and attributed to the past.
I believe that these logical and realistic observations…were enough for me to reach complete certainty that this name was a mistake, and there is another name hidden behind that heroic and epic history that tickles the emotions.
I believe that it is also sufficient for everyone to ensure that there is no historical figure named Ramesses and that the first foundation on which the West built translations of inscriptions is invalid… and without even trying to re-translate the name of this king.
————————————
Our arrival at this certainty does not prevent us from increasing the certainty further until we reach certainty….. And so far we will not come close to rereading the inscriptions, but rather we will continue to think about the history that was presented to us.
But where did this name come from?
According to the history that was written for us.
That despite…the West’s discovery of the Rosetta Stone and the Philae Obelisk, on which are written the names of two Greek kings in ancient Egyptian and Greek, which enabled Western scientists to discover the number of phonetic values for a number of symbols….but the Rosetta Stone was not enough. To decipher ancient Egyptian writing.
Champollion… was very inclined to know the ancient Egyptian language and the ancient civilization of Misr, and what he read from Greek and Roman books helped him in that. He learned the Tibetan language and was forced to meet some of the Coptic community in Paris until he mastered it well, so much so that he became a professor. In teaching Jabbati.
Champollion’s mastery of the Jebetic language, in addition to Greek and other languages, and his great knowledge of history, all of this made him try to decipher ancient Egyptian writing, and he wanted to take credit for deciphering this writing.
He was very involved in this scientific and historical mission, and he was forced to buy pieces, paintings, and drawings in order to gain the honor of this scientific conquest that would immortalize his name in history.
In the year 1822…an antiquity arrived to Champollion from a friend. It had been removed from one of Misr’s temples and contained a royal frame inside which were written these three symbols shown in the picture.
As for the first symbol…its phonetic value was known, because it was present in the Rosetta Stone…and its phonetic value is: S
When Champollion held the piece, he knew very well that this frame must contain the name of a king, because this frame was specific to the names of kings.
Champollion’s mind began to work and his eyes were fixed on the piece. The agitation and tension increased, and his hand began to tremble. The name began with the symbol (sun), and because Champollion had knowledge of the Tibetan language and a wide knowledge of it, in addition to having met Copts, he knew that The word (sun) means in the Jebeti language…. (shepherd).
So, the king’s name begins with (Ra’), followed by a symbol that is still unknown, then followed by a repeated symbol representing a folded piece of cloth.
Ra .( * ) .S.S
Proper name…begins with (ra’)
And here an idea flashed into Champollion’s head:
What if the king’s name was Rameses, the most famous king of ancient Misr who was read about in the writings of the Greeks and Romans?
With trembling hands, Champollion began to flip through the other drawings, thoughts racing intensely, and then his gaze once again fixed on another image containing the same symbol: It ends with the same symbol in the artifact, which is (S), and begins with an image of the sacred bird Ibis, which embodies the Allah. A berry, and in the middle is the same unknown symbol
If Champollion’s thesis is correct regarding the name (Ra – m – s – s),
The middle symbol only means the letter (m).
So the name is Totmus (Thout – m – s).
Indeed, Thutmose was the second most famous king of ancient Misr.
There was no doubt. The veil had fallen from Champollion’s eyes, and here he was holding in his hand the key to the history of ancient Misr, which had been lost for 1,500 years.
Champollion announced his discovery at the French Society of Sciences and Languages… and the audience applauded him… so much so that the most famous linguist at that time, De Sacy, who is credited with developing the first theories of linguistics, rose from his chair and embraced him warmly… De Sacy finally admitted his genius to Champollion, who had always dreamed of sitting with de Sacy.
Champollion’s genius appeared in the fact that he discovered the phonetic values of the rest of the symbols himself.
This genius made the King of France give him a gold box engraved with the words:
“This is a gift from the King of France, Louis XVIII, to Champollion for his discovery of the hieroglyphic alphabet.”
Then France honored him as one of the greats of history, and he was appointed director of the museum and professor of Egyptology at the university, and his name was entered into the pantheon of French immortals.
Chateaubriand said about him:
“The name of Champollion is still alive, as long as these monuments whose mysterious secrets were revealed to us remain.”
————————————
Now, if we think carefully about this history that was presented to us, we will find several logical observations:
■ Champollion is the first person to pronounce the name of this king in the modern era, and because of his pronouncement of the king’s name, he was considered one of the greats of history.
■ Champollion was not the first to discover the name of this king, because this king had previously existed in Greek books that talked about him as the most famous king of Misr.
Because the pronunciation of this king’s name (Ramesses) existed before Champollion, and Champollion did nothing but drop a name found in Greek books onto symbols in Egyptian inscriptions.
■ Champollion did not personally extract the phonetic values of the Egyptian inscriptions. Rather, Greek names imposed their phonetic values on the symbols in the Egyptian inscriptions. That is, credit goes to the Greek language, which discovered the phonetic values of symbols.
the question :
Why did Champollion not rely on the Arabic language to decipher Misr’s inscriptions and chose Jeppet, even though most of Misr’s population were Arabic speakers, and logic says that the language of the population of Misr at that time must have been the language of the inscriptions?!
How did Champollion know that Ramses was the most famous king of Misr, and that Thutmose was the second most famous king of Misr?
from Greece .
So the Greeks knew and wrote a lot of history about Misr. Did they live during the era of Rameses until they knew him?
No…. Rameses after his death.
Al-Saral: How did Greece obtain information about this king? Is it through conversations or through documents?!
If it was from documents, then it is certain that they were able to read the Egyptian inscriptions, so why did they not explain to us how they deciphered the inscriptions, and why did they not think of writing to the West and Champollion a book in which they explained the translations of the Egyptian inscriptions, to save their descendants in the West the trouble and fatigue of years in order to decipher the Egyptian inscriptions?!
————————————
There are many kings in Misr, but why was Ramses in particular considered the most famous king of Misr, and Thutmose the second most famous king of Misr?!
I believe that the answer to this question will lead us to a very important observation.
If you observe most of the places that the West calls temples, you will find that the symbols of the name of King Ramesses are permanently present within an oval frame. Even the symbols of the name of King Thutmose are abundant in most of Misr’s temples.
It is very certain…that this observation is the input that formulated the idea of Ramses and Thutmose being the most famous kings of Misr.
This observation makes us feel that there is something to be hidden, and makes us move to the next step, until we are more certain.
The step… is to realize and know the foundations, method and approach that Champollion adopted in deciphering the inscriptions of ancient Misr… and research it and ask: Is it truly scientific and logical?
According to the date provided to us
Champollion found that the first symbol of the name (Ramesses) is the sun, and it is pronounced in the Jebetic language as “Ra”.
We’ll go see these symbols:
According to the Champollion dictionary approved by the most prestigious universities in the West
1- The first symbol that is pronounced (Ra’)…. means sun…. is written (Ra’).
2- The second symbol pronounced (mes)… means a child, calf, or bird… written (mes – m)
3- The third symbol is pronounced (Sai)… it means folded cloth… written (S)
Now, if we think with complete confidence in ourselves, and are free from the Khawaja complex and the intellectual centrality of the West, we will make logical observations here:
1- The first symbol that looks like the sun is actually circular, but the sun is not drawn in this way, because the first symbol is a small circle inside a larger circle, and any human on earth will draw the sun in the form of one circle, and a child will also draw the sun in the form of only one circle. It is assumed that the ancient Egyptian would also draw the sun, just like us, as one circle.
Especially if we search the Egyptian writing, we will find that he drew other symbols for the sun in the shape of a single circle.
So this symbol is not a sun
2- The second symbol looks strange, but Champollion said it means a child, a calf, or a bird…..and other dictionaries say it means fox skins.
If we accept this logic, we will be an enchanted people. If you ask an ordinary child, “Does this shape look like a child, a calf, or a bird?” he will tell you no. And if you ask an old man, “Does this shape look like the shape of leather?” ..He will tell you no.
On what basis did Champollion consider this symbol to be a child, a calf, or a bird?! ……. Because he is French, has blond hair, and speaks French, will we believe him?!
So this symbol is not a child, a calf, a bird, or a skin.
3- The third symbol… Champollion says that it is a piece of folded cloth, but this symbol does not look at all like a folded cloth, because the Egyptian in ancient times could draw a piece of cloth in a very clear way, just like today, if someone asks you to draw a piece of folded cloth, you will draw it as it appears. It is clear to everyone that it is a folded cloth.
So this symbol is not a piece of cloth.
————————————
So… logical, scientific, and realistic thinking tells us that there cannot be a person named Rameses, and also Champollion’s approach to pronouncing those symbols is funny and contains some kind of fallacies.
There is no logic, science, and reality with Rameses, nor logic, science, and reality with Champollion.
So…we are in the stage of certainty that the matter is wrong, that is, we are entering into a historical mistake or into a major international fraudulent game.
————————————
We heard…it is the correct translation of these symbols found in the temples of Misr, which Champollion pronounced with the word (Raameses).
(We heard)… because we are inside a religious place and all its words must be within the connection with Allah.
{Have you not seen those who were given a share of the Book, buying astray and desiring that you should go astray from the path? (44) Allah knows best your enemies, and Allah is sufficient as a guardian, and Allah is sufficient as a Helper. (45) Of those who are Al-Yahoud, they distort the words from their proper place, and say, “We hear and disobey,” and “listen without listening,” and “we consider [me] to be with their tongues, and slander the religion, even if it were not.” Indeed, they said, “We hear and we obey, and listen and look to us.” It would have been better for them and more upright, but Allah has cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe only a few. (46) O you who have been given the book, believe in what We have sent down, confirming what is with you before We obliterate faces and turn them back on their backs, or curse them as We cursed the companions of the Sabbath, and Allah’s command was in effect. (47) Indeed, Allah does not forgive anyone associating others with Him, but He forgives what is less than that to whomever He wills. And whoever associates anything with Allah has invented a great sin. (48) Have you not seen those who purify themselves? Rather, Allah purifies whom He wills, and they do not wrong a little. (49) Look at how they invent lies against Allah, and that is enough. It is a clear sin. (50) Have you not seen those who were given a share of the Book? They believe in Al-Jibt (Egypt) and Taghut (Dometic) and say to those who disbelieve, “These are more guided to a path than those who believe.”
————————————
The West invented the name of this king……. because this word was abundant in temples, so the West invented for us the character of a king and his name is present in every temple, and the West convinced us that the reason for the abundance of this word is because these temples were built by this king. Then he invented for us the story of Ramses II, III, and IV, so that Ramesses I would not become the owner of all the temples… and made this king the most famous king of Misr.
Now look with us at this sarcastic scene presented by the West.
The correct pronunciation of all the names that the West obtained in Egyptian tombs and temples and were named after Rameses is (we heard).
We heard the first one
We heard the second one
We heard the third
.
.
.
We heard the eleventh
A scene that raises laughter…and arouses intense anger at the same time when you realize the extent of the depravity, despicability, and crimes of the West.
————————–
Are you sure, or are you still not sure?!
Come with me, and look at the same previous story that happened in Misr, but it happened in Yemen.
In a previous article, I talked about the Musnad line and we asked a question:
On what basis did the ancient inhabitants of Yemen write these inscriptions? What is the criterion that made them adopt these symbols in their writing?!
We reached a conclusion: the existence of a law from a previous authority within the line itself.
This result forces us to believe that there is an older written form, but in a very different form. In other words, if we represent the Musnad line with an electronic pen, then there must have been an ink pen before it, from which it took the form.
The search process will lead us to Misr, where we will find the ink pen, and we will reach the law that exists within the structure of the script itself… which imposed these written forms in the Musnad script.
We asked two logical and important questions:
■ Al-Musnad is found in Yemen…and the hieroglyphs are found in Misr, and there are no political borders between them. Rather, there is distance and a sea separating the two places.
Is it possible that the people of Yemen endured the trouble and inconvenience of traveling to Misr, in order to obtain from it very easy and simple written symbols?!
Is it difficult for ancient people in Yemen to invent and create their own writing with completely new and different symbols, and write their local script with it?! ………. What is the strong authority that made people in Yemen not invent their own symbols, and import a script from outside its borders?! …Although the topic is very easy and not complicated.
This work… indicates that the world is very ancient… and it was continuous… and there was a globalized, connected world, and the ancient man in Yemen saw hieroglyphs as his sacred book, and This book has cognitive, sacred, and religious authority for him…and Misr was a center linked to ancient man in Yemen, otherwise he would not have traveled all this distance to take these symbols from it.
This indicates that man in Yemen and man in Misr had one religious and cognitive space.
■ If a person in Yemen had endured the trouble of traveling in order to search for written symbols from Egyptian writing, then the question is:
Did humans in Yemen take form only from Egyptian inscriptions, or did they take the form along with the phonetic value?!
I think it is… it is unreasonable that this authority imposed on people in Yemen not to invent their own symbols and shapes, and made them take them from Misr… so they take the symbols randomly, according to a logic based on… The phrase “symbols only…the important thing is that we write.”
Because if the matter were just symbols, he would have invented symbols for himself, and the matter is not difficult…but his insistence on not inventing symbols…and then his departure takes the symbols of his writing from Misr, so it is logical that a person in Yemen would take both.
Logically ……. will take the symbol along with its sound value.
————————————
As everyone knows, the West was the one who also translated the Musnad inscriptions, just as it translated the Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions.. The West wrote for the Yemenis a long, broad history about a large and huge kingdom called the Kingdom of (Sami). A large tribal union called the Kingdom of Sami.
Many researches and many writings have been published about it. Because of this story, theories emerged that the Kingdom of Sami was founded by the Prophet Ismail or was related to him.
If you visit Yemen, you will notice that many of the oldest mosques currently in Yemen, where people still pray, have inscriptions on their walls in Musnad script.
The history of the Kingdom of Sami was written by the West from the inscriptions found in the temples of ancient Yemen.
Look…at the predicate letters of the word (auditory) translated by the West, which are in the picture inside the black box.
You will find that the beginning of the word is (the letter S) and the end is (the letter Ya).
Now notice……. how the two symbols found in the Musnad inscriptions match 100% with the two symbols present at the beginning and end of the word (Ramesses) which is written in hieroglyphic script.
(A symbol containing three threads down) (a circle with a line under it)
A very, very clear match, even for a blind person…but the difference is a developmental stage in time and nothing more in drawing written forms.
Now look: how the word in Misr is (Ramesses) and the word in Yemen is (sami)… even though they are written with very similar and very identical symbols.
But according to the logic we talked about previously, the Yemenis took the written symbols from Misr along with the phonetic values of each symbol, and this logically imposes that the pronunciation of the two words is similar.
This makes us put forward a logical idea:
As for the word in Misr, it is actually (Ramesses), and therefore the pronoun of the word in Yemen must be (Rameses)… As for the pronoun of the word in Yemen, it is actually (auditory), and therefore the word in Misr must be To be (auditory) as well.
Notice how the word written in Musnad lines is quite similar to our translation of the word written in hieroglyphic inscriptions.
Is it a coincidence that the symbols are similar between Misr and Yemen, and that the word in Yemen is (hearing), and similar to what we have found in that the correct pronunciation of the word in Misr is (samaa)?
Auditory = we heard
Matching in writing symbols and matching in translation.
So our previous logic is very sound and correct, that when the Yemeni took the forms of his writing symbols from Misr, he would take the form with the phonetic value.
This will lead us to an issue about the validity of the West’s translations of the Yemeni inscriptions and will make us ask a logical question: Does this last symbol written in the predicate have the phonetic value (y) or the phonetic value (n)?
Is the word in the Musnad inscriptions “sami” or “sammana”?
Of course (we heard)
Because forgery in Misr also occurred in Yemen and throughout the region, and the last letter is nothing but the letter (n) and not (y) in the Musnad.
Is the word written in hieroglyphic symbols “Ramesses” or is it the word “We heard” found in the Qur’an and attested to in the Musnad inscriptions?!
The West invented for the Yemenis the story of a famous kingdom, just as the West invented the story of a famous king for the Egyptians, because of the presence of this word in abundance in the inscriptions of the ancient region.
The truth is that there is no kingdom called (Sami) in Yemen, and there is no king named (Ramesses) at all in Misr, except in the false imagination of the West.
Because the West knows the truth about the inscriptions of the region, its time, and its history, and it knows that all the inscriptions in the region came from one origin, one book, and one language. The West knows well that all of them are sacred religious inscriptions found in ancient mosques in Misr, Yemen, the Levant and Iraq, and it has deliberately carried out the largest historical forgery operation.
{Do you hope that they will believe in you, when a group of them used to hear the word of Allah and then distort it after they had understood it while they knew?}
.
.