2023-05-01T09:37:00-08:00
2019-09-03
What is the meaning of the Quranic text?
{O you who have believed, prescribed for you is qisas for the slain: the free for the free, the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. So whoever is pardoned for anything from his brother, then follow what is right and pay back to him with kindness. That is an alleviation from your Allah and a mercy. But whoever transgresses after that will have a painful punishment. And for you is life in qisas, O people of understanding, that you may become righteous.}
First, let us take a small tour of the books of the Ottoman printer to see what these books said about this text, to know well the huge extent of corruption present in these books, and the size of the forgery project within which the region lived, and that these books were a systematic and elaborately prepared project. He was malicious, and he knew well the meanings of the Qur’an, but he deliberately distorted the meanings in the mind of the Muslim
——————————
We will quote for you from Al-Tabari’s book, which is found in almost all schools of thought.
■ O you who have believed, qisas for the dead has been prescribed for you, free for free, slave for slave, female for female. That is, if a free man kills a free man, then the blood of the killer is sufficient for the blood of the murdered, and qisas is from him rather than from other people, so do not go beyond killing to someone else who was not killed, for it is forbidden for you to kill someone other than his murderer with your murderer. The obligation that Allah imposed on us in qisas is what was described as abandoning transgression as qisas, killing the killer by killing someone else, not that it is obligatory upon us to retaliate, as an obligation to impose prayer and fasting, so that we do not have the right to abandon it.
You have a safe life in legislating and implementing qisas – O people of sound minds -; Hope to fear Allah and fear Him by always obeying Him.
■ The reason for the revelation of this Quranic text
The verse was revealed about two parties that fought during the reign of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and killed each other. So the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ordered that reconciliation be made between them, that the blood money of the women of one of the two parties be dropped in return for the women of the other, and the blood money of their men for the blood money of their men, and the blood money of their slaves for the blood money of their slaves as qisas. This is a meaning with them. qisas in this verse.
It was said that the people of two Arab sects fought, one of whom was a Muslim and the other a covenanter, over some matter between the Arabs, and the Prophet, may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him, reconciled between them. They had killed free men, slaves, and women, with the free man paying the blood money for the free, the slave paying the blood money for the slave, and the female paying the blood money for the female, so he requited them. each other.
■ If someone says – when you mentioned that the meaning of his saying: “qisas has been prescribed for you” means: qisas has been imposed on you -: no meaning is known for the one who said “he wrote” except the meaning of writing that out, so he drew a line and a book, then what is your proof that the meaning of his saying “he wrote” is obligatory?
It was said: This is present in the speech of the Arabs, and in their poetry it is extensive, and among them is the poet’s saying: Murder and fighting are ordained upon us, and chaste women must drag their tails, and the saying of Nabigha Bani Ja’dah: O daughter of my cousin, the Book of Allah has taken me away from you. Did Allah prevent me from what they did? And that is more in their poetry and speech than can be counted. . However, even if that means an obligation, in my view it is taken from the book, which is a drawing and a handwriting, and that is because Allah Almighty mentioned Him. He wrote down all that was imposed on His servants and what they dealt with in the Preserved Tablet, and Allah Almighty said, mentioning it in the Qur’an: {Rather, it is a glorious Qur’an in a tablet. Preserved} And he said: {Indeed, it is a Noble Qur’an in a hidden Book} It has become clear from this that everything He imposed upon us in the Preserved Tablet is written, so the meaning of the saying, since that is so: {qisas is decreed upon you} qisas for the dead is decreed upon you in the Preserved Tablet, enjoining that you not kill for the murdered other than Kill him.
■ Summary of meaning
O you who have believed Allah and His Messenger and acted according to His law, Allah has imposed on you that you take qisas against the murderer intentionally by killing him, on the condition of equality and similarity: the free man shall be killed in the same way, the slave in the same way, and the female in the same way. Whoever is forgiven by the guardian of the murdered person by pardoning him from qisas and merely taking the blood money – which is a specific amount of money paid by the offender in exchange for his pardon – then both parties must adhere to good conduct, so the guardian demands the blood money without violence, and the killer pays his due to him kindly, without delay or deficiency. That pardon, along with taking the blood money, is an alleviation from your Allah and a mercy for you. Because of its ease and benefit. Whoever kills the killer after pardoning him and taking the blood money will have a painful punishment by killing him as qisas in this world, or by fire in the hereafter.
————————————
Of course, we have previously understood the meaning of qisas, and we are certain of the meaning and intent of the verse…but if we assume that qisas is a judicial ruling…
The logical questions:
Does the phrase “free for free” bear the meaning found in the books of the Ottoman printer… that if a free man kills a free person, then the blood of the killer is sufficient for the blood of the murdered, and qisas is from him rather than from other people, so do not pass the killing on to someone else who was not killed, for it is forbidden for you to kill with your murdered person other than his murderer.
Logic says that if the Qur’anic text intended this meaning, then it would have been better for the text to be: (The soul is for the soul and does not transcend it), especially since this formula is present in the Qur’an in another text.
What is the reason for this formula if the meaning was the meaning in the books of the Uthmans, or if he had to elaborate on this meaning further?
Why wasn’t the text (qisas for the dead is decreed upon you, life for life)… and the matter is over.
How is it appropriate for Allah to impose qisas on the Muslim for the dead, a clear and frank matter…and then talk about who he pardons and then asks not to go beyond the killing?
How can qisas be free for free, slave for slave, and female for female?!
Does this mean… if a free man kills a slave, he will not be retaliated against him, and if a man kills a female, then he will not be requited?!
An illogical sentence in its wording… and the meaning is certainly different.
But the books of the Ottoman printer found a way out of this contradiction, and wrote for the Muslim the story of the abrogated and abrogated, and said that the verse was revealed previously and then abrogated with the text (a soul for a soul).
How could the reason for the revelation be an arbitration incident regarding the blood money for dead people that occurred during the Prophet’s era between two tribes, and the Prophet equated the blood money for the dead, with the free man for the free man, the slave for the slave, and the female for the female….. even though the text is clear:
qisas for the dead has been prescribed for you, and he did not say: qisas for the blood money has been prescribed for you?
This story, which was presented by the Ottoman printer’s books, is another attempt, but it is more difficult and complex…………to find a logical solution to the contradictory meaning of the sentence (free for free, slave for slave, female for female).
Because how can Allah’s justice be upright, with this text that differentiates between the dead, the free man, the slave, and the female?!
Also, since the text says (the free for the free and the slave for the slave), it is assumed that the text also says (and the female for the female and the male for the male).
Why did the text mention the free, and the opposite of the free (slave), and mention the female, but not the opposite of the female (the male)?!
What does the word “his brother” have to do with a general ruling on murder and qisas?!
The text is supposed to be (and whoever pardons) without mentioning the word (his brother).
Also, the word (the dead) in the text seems somewhat strange in the context of the common meaning that many have… Or this is not the place.
Because the text here… has made the ruling come after the event (the murder) occurs, meaning that the text wants the event to occur (the murdered) in order to state its general ruling, and this is illogical… because the ruling is supposed to precede the event… that is, it would have been more appropriate to say ( qisas for murder has been prescribed for you.
If the word (the dead) means the murdered…then the murdered include very many types: the man, the child, the old, the free, the slave, the female, the male, the pregnant woman, etc.
On what basis were the dead classified (free, slave, and female), gender, age, gender, or societal arrangement?!… What is the reference classification that we can follow according to the classification of the Qur’an, so that we can make an analogy if we encounter an incident of killing someone? Outside of these categories?
What is the category that brings these people together in one category?!
Why were the dead assigned to three categories (free, slave, and female), when there is no common denominator between the three?
If the text were satisfied with the sentence (free for free and slave for slave)…we would know the basis of classification…but there is not a single thing in common between (free, slave, and female).
Then how is it correct that the murdered person was a female and the killer was a man, and we go looking for a female so that we can retaliate against her… And do not tell me that the matter is blood money, because if it was blood money, the word would have been mentioned in the text.
I cannot imagine a religious text that encourages murder, and then comes with a general ruling for everyone… This ruling is very strange and there is no justice in it.
A closed circle with no logical exit.
Everything is illogical according to the interpretations of the Ottoman printer’s books
Look…………at the extreme deception found in Al-Tabari’s book, as he warns and alerts the Muslim that if someone says that the word (our books) means writing and writing, then it is false and he provides proof and evidence from Arab poetry, as he claims.
Because who wrote the book Al-Tabari… It is known that the word (our books) actually means calligraphy and written drawing… and it is the true and certain meaning capable of extracting the Muslim from this closed, absurd circle. He understood the meaning of his highest sacred text, and explained the text with great ability. The one who is able to remove the Muslim from the game of the devils of the West and the Ottomans that they played in the region.
————————————
now …. What is the interpretation of this line {O you who have believed, qisas for the dead has been prescribed for you, the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the female for the female}?
■ First… Read this text
{Whoever kills a soul for other than for manslaughter or corruption in the land, it is as if he killed all of mankind, and whoever saves a life, it is as if he saved all of mankind.}
A very clear text, this is the general logical ruling in the case of murder, one life for another… and the author of this text cannot intend to reverse this common sense in the other text {O you who have believed, qisas is decreed upon you for the murdered, the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the female for the female}.
■ Secondly… Read the texts that came before this text, so that you can be more certain that the topic is related to the book, and that the word “our books” means written drawing or calligraphy.
{Indeed, those who conceal what Allah has sent down of the Book and exchange it for a small price – those eat nothing into their bellies except fire, and Allah will not speak to them on the Day of Resurrection nor purify them, and they will have a painful punishment. (174) Those are those who have bought error for guidance and punishment for forgiveness – but none can be patient with the Fire. (175) That is because Allah The Book was sent down with the truth, and indeed those who differ in the Book are in far-reaching discord.}
■ In the previous article, we raised a topic about the meaning of (and wounds are qisas)?!
We asked the question: How did you understand this text?
{And We decreed for them therein that an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and qisas for wounds.}
Almost here you understood that the text contains five things:
Eyes, nose, ears, teeth, wounds… And the speech commands us to implement qisas in these five matters.
Because of the occurrence of the word (eye, nose, ear, and tooth) in the Qur’anic sentence, you thought that we were moving in a sequential manner, among topics related to the human body. So when we came to the word (wounds)… I thought it meant the plural of wound (which is a cut in the body).
In the previous article, we talked about an important note… which is that all five things were mentioned in the text in the singular form, except for the word (wounds), which was mentioned in the plural form… This made us ask a question about the reason, because the text is supposed to be (a wound for a wound).
But if you try to contemplate the text of the Qur’an more… You will find that the text of the Qur’an talks about things we know (the eye, the nose, the ear, the tooth) as a practical and applied example, and then it gives us a general rule that we can follow in doing the same example if we encounter something other than the four things… anything that applies to it in a general way…. We do the same method as before.
Example :
If you had a large bus for passengers, and you encountered two families on your way, you would stop for them until they got on and say to them:
[Every two in a chair…child for child, teenager for teenager, and ages are qisas]
This sentence means: The old man is the old man, and the 40-year-old is the 40-year-old.
In the example, we specified the basis for qisas, which is age.
In this text, we have defined the basis of qisas as wounds, and the word “wounds” includes (the eye, nose, ear, tooth, hand, tongue, etc.).
permission
All wounds are punished in the same way… That is, the Qur’an gave us at the beginning an example of the method, then at the end of the text it gave us the general rule that proceeds in the same way.
Now… when you look at the writing symbols that are falsely called hieroglyphs, you will find that they contain very many symbols from almost everything around us, but there are things in common between some of the symbols, and we can collect all the common symbols into certain groups.
For example:
You find there symbols from parts of the human body, there are symbols related to geography, there are symbols related to plants, etc.
The word “wounds” refers to the total number of verses (symbols) related to the human body (tongue, stomach, hand, eye, leg, etc.)
So when the Qur’anic text says:
{And We prescribed for them therein that a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and qisas for wounds.}
It means
We decreed for them therein that a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a stomach for a stomach, a tongue for a tongue, and a head for a head… etc
The summary of the Qur’anic line is a general rule:
{We prescribed for them in the Torah qisas for wounds, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth.}
Now… when we match the word (eye) with (the figurative symbol eye), and we match the word (ear) with (the figurative symbol ear)… and we match the word (tongue) with (the figurative symbol tongue)… etc.
This process is called qisas… What is meant by the Quranic text.
qisas is: matching between two similar things, and in the Qur’an it means matching between the word and the verse, that is, matching the word with the pictorial symbol in hieroglyphs that is similar or identical to it.
As for wounds, it is the plural of wound, and it is any part of the human body.
Now…we have the right to understand this Quranic text in this other wording:
{And We prescribed for them qisas for wounds, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth.}
Because it has the same meaning as the original text
{And We prescribed for them therein that a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and qisas for wounds.}
correct ?!
So……..we have the right to rephrase the text {O you who have believed, qisas for the dead has been prescribed for you, the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the female for the female}
To the first formula, which is similar to the formula (and wounds are qisas)
{O you who have believed, it is decreed for you in the Torah: The free for the free, the slave for the slave, the female for the female, and qisas for the dead.}
The meaning of qisas here in this text (qisas for the dead is prescribed for you)… will be the same as the previous meaning that we talked about in the previous text (wounds are qisas).
{And We prescribed for them therein that a life for a life, and an eye for an eye, and a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth, and qisas for wounds.}
■ Now… the very important question:
Now let me formulate the text for you in another way…and imagine that the text is written in this format:
{O you who have believed, it is decreed for you in the Torah: The free for the free, the slave for the slave, the female for the female, and qisas for the dead.}
How will you understand this text?
Will you understand the text with the same understanding as you first understood the other text, which came to you from the books of the Ottoman printer?!
Let’s say yes
As long as… And since you understood the other text (and wounds are qisas) as talking about five things (the eye, the nose, the ear, the tooth, and wounds), then you are supposed to understand this text in the same way.
That is, this text must be understood
{O you who have believed, it is decreed for you in the Torah: The free for the free, the slave for the slave, the female for the female, and qisas for the dead.}
He is talking about four different things (the free man, the slave, the female, and the dead), and there is no relationship between the free person and the dead, just like there is no relationship between the eye and wounds.
correct ?!
So how will you understand the text in this format?!
You will understand that the free man is for the free man, the slave is for the slave, and the female is for the female, but you do not know what is meant by this sentence?! He was talking about a completely different topic.
But when you reach the sentence (and the dead are qisas), then logically and quickly you will understand this text very easily, and that it means the process of qisas in killing.
correct ?!
If the last sentence is very understandable, and that the Qur’an asks us to retaliate for murder, then what is the meaning of the free for the free, the slave for the slave, and the female for the female?
In this formulation, there is no relationship at all… because the last sentence talks about qisas for murder… The first sentence talks about another topic that has nothing to do with murder.
Because the text talks about certain things and something else called the dead, meaning that the description of killing is not linked to the free man, the slave, or the female.
Example :
Does it make sense to say: Take the pen, pencil, and pens.
A logically incorrect sentence… How do I mention the word pens, when I mentioned the ink pen and the pencil?
But the logical sentence is to say: Take the pen, pencil, and books.
So books are something completely different from pen and pencil.
Therefore, the dead are something completely different from the slave, the free man, and the female.
As long as the word (the dead) is something different from the rest of the things, then the slave, the free man, and the female do not carry the quality of murder…that is, qisas here is a different topic.
This is according to the previous logic
But wait……. Why do we not understand the text as it is before we reach the sentence (and the dead are qisas)?!
That is… We prescribed for you in the Torah that the free man is for the free man, the slave is for the slave, and the female is for the female.
Any ordinary writing… Here the issue will begin to become very clear, that it is very ordinary writing, and has nothing to do with murder.
■ Now let us make a comparison in understanding the two texts
The first text: “And We prescribed for them therein that a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and qisas for wounds.”
The second text: “O you who have believed, it is decreed for you that the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the female for the female, and qisas for the dead.”
In the first text, you understand the meaning well that Allah is addressing the Al-Yahoud and is concerned with them, and that the judgment of qisas has been decreed upon the Al-Yahoud in the Torah, but in the second text, when Allah addresses you and says, O you who have believed, qisas has been decreed upon you for the dead, you do not want to understand. Never say that Allah has prescribed for you in the Torah the ruling on qisas as well, and you believe that the Torah is something that is not related to you.
Allah decreed for them in the Torah, but where did Allah decree for you, O Muslim, qisas for the dead?!
In the Torah, of course
In the first text, you believe that Allah sent down the Book of the Torah to the Al-Yahoud, but in the second text, you do not believe at all that Allah sent down the Book of the Torah to you.
In the first text, you understood qisas in five things, but in the second text, you will definitely understand qisas as being related to one thing, which is killing, while the other things have nothing to do with killing.
In the first text, you understood that the topic was a judicial ruling, qisas for the process of damaging a part of the human body, and in the second text, you understood qisas for murder, wherever it may be.
In the first text, you understood that qisas would also be for the eye, nose, ear, tooth, and wounds, even though qisas was linked to wounds only, but in the second text you would understand that qisas would also be for killing, because qisas was linked to the dead, while the slave, the free man, and the female had no relationship. To kill him.
Although the two formulas are similar and identical, your logic is different in understanding the meaning of each text.
Contradiction… right?!
———————————————-
Now the word “dead” will become clear, just as the word “wounds” was clear in
The first text, The Dead, is a classification of a group of verses (the symbols found in Egyptian inscriptions falsely called hieroglyphs).
O you who have believed, qisas for the dead has been prescribed for you:
any …. O you illiterate people who have believed…it is decreed upon you to match the verses of the Book that are in the group classified as the dead, the birds that kill the dead…in the following manner: free with free, slave with slave, and female with female.
qisas for the dead has been decreed upon you, just as qisas for wounds has been decreed upon you… Exactly…that is, you must perform the same operation that we did in the previous example (an eye for an eye and a nose for a nose…).
now …. Look at this bird drawn in the picture inside the red circle.
This bird……. In some areas of Misr, especially the countryside, it is known as Al-Har.
This bird was known throughout the region…before the entry of Napoleon and his soldiers as (the free bird)…and it is still known today in Iraq, Syria and even Morocco…(the free bird)…
Since qisas for the dead is prescribed for us, free for free, we must now:
To match the word (the free bird) with (the pictorial symbol for the free bird).
Now look at the translation of this symbol by Champollion and the West, and how they wrote his name (Horus)… On the basis that he was a Allah worshiped in Misr.
The Qur’an is the word of Allah… and it tells us that (Al-Hurr) is a verse (symbol) in the Book of Allah, like the rest of the other verses (symbols), such as (the symbol of the ear) and (the symbol of the hand), a written script, and is not a Allah and was never worshiped in ancient times, and This indicates that the statues of this bird in Misr are not statues for worship, but rather statues of it as decoration. Because of the strong attachment people have to this bird, they photographed it… That is, the issue is not holiness or worship that was invented by Champollion and the group of the West… but rather, something like the images that We now capture things just as we take a picture with a camera of this bird and keep it.
The bird of heat (Horus Champollion) has become one of Allah’s commands upon us, to match its name (Al-Har) with (the pictorial symbol of the bird of heat).
But why did the West deliberately call him (Horus)?
Very natural.. If this bird was named with the same phonetic value (free) found in Misr and the region, then if the word resonated with the soul, it would not suggest the idea that the bird was worshiped in Misr, the Allah of Misr, because the word is still in circulation in the present and is still felt, and we realize The moral value of the word free.
But when we add to the word the musical letter “S” or the “S” of Shaytan, the impact of the word will be different in the soul…..its impact in the soul will be as if it were a legendary magical world from the magical, imaginary worlds of Greece, and people can then be easily convinced that Horus was an ancient Allah worshiped by the Egyptians in ancient times. .
The West completely wants to take people out of reality and enter them into the Greek magical space, which is filled with enchanting musical words that end with “S”. The West does not want people to connect the present and the past with any word they still use.
Because people’s connection to the past through anything present in the present means that they will own the past and the land, while the lack of connection between the people’s present and the real past means that the people’s past is the property of the West and the land is the property of the West.
Because this bird was closely linked to humans in the region, the West changed its name and made it like a Allah that was worshiped in ancient times.
The West has created an estrangement of society from the environment, reality, and the inheritance of the ancestors…just as the Samaritan Champollion estranged himself from the signs of Allah.
You can feel the project of alienation that the West has imposed on us, when you read the response of a person who uploaded an article about Horus that was written by the West… and that the hieroglyphics are glyphic poplars… and another person commented on it by saying: This bird is known in Tunisia and Algeria as the Hur.
The author of the article was very sarcastic and said: His name is Horus and his words have nothing to do with it, because it is the name of a Allah that the Egyptians worshiped, and it is possible that the Egyptians extended their state there and they took his name from the Egyptians and changed it to Al-Hur.
The writer of the article and the commentator have not yet understood… that the world in ancient times was not governed by the laws of today… it did not know at all any political borders like today, and the land was one, and the people were one nation.
Also, the author of the article is certain that the idea did not occur to him that the translations of the Western occupier are fake…but we always love the imported one and we are very sensitive to the local or the local…because it is not chic, cute and musical, this is a culture planted by the occupier, and it is reflected in our outlook. For things in the environment and nature around us.
We find this culture a lot among the American hatters, the Zahi Hawass group, and the rest of the Greek history group.
———————————————-
What does this mean ?!
Because we care a lot… about thinking about information and ways to search for information more. The previous results that we have reached will help us in developing our scientific research approach.
how ?
■ The insistence of Al-Tabari’s book…on warning the Muslim during his interpretation of this verse, and a categorical denial of those who say that the word (our books) means writing. It indicates that we are inside a big, carefully woven game, and this gives us a very important point about the way to deal with the books of the Ottoman printer. Because most of the books of the Ottoman printer were a clever project to distort the vocabulary of the Qur’an in the mind of the Muslim, and then we will realize, during our research in the books of the Ottoman printer, what place the first one who wrote these books wanted to take us to, and why… This point is important in realizing awareness before the process of distortion and Comparing it with reality and the texts of the Qur’an.
■ The free bird… it was not known in the past in any geographical spot in the region except by this name, and it was not
A term called a falcon.
The word falcon… is a very modern word. It came to us in a recent period, specifically during the period of the Ottomans’ presence in the region. I believe that because of the fame of this bird and its association with humans in the region, the project deliberately distorted the name of this bird… in order to distort human awareness. In the region with its environment… Therefore, you find that the word “falcon” is widely used by residents of the cities of the region. Because of the educational curricula restricted to the dictionaries of the Ottoman printer.
This time fact… It makes us reach a new rule to be added to our approach… This rule says: that any Arabic book in which the word falcon is mentioned or this bird is called a falcon… and we are told that this book was written 1000 years ago or 600 years ago, it is undoubtedly a lie. ..The book was written in a very recent period.
This rule… will help us a lot in sifting through the heritage books that have reached us through the printer, because it gives us a time scale through which we can understand the time of the text.
.
And this proven result… can be applied to the story of the Quraish falcon… Abd al-Rahman al-Dakhel… which is said to be 1,200 years old. It is impossible that people at that time in the entire region were calling the name of the free bird after the falcon.
And to be more certain that the word (falcon) is modern, and that the story of the Quraish falcon was written recently.
Haven’t you asked yourself why Abdul Rahman Al-Dakhel was called the Falcon of Quraish?
Why did they call this man the Falcon of Quraysh… Why did Quraysh wait so long for a man to appear and be called the Falcon of Quraysh? Why did the title not appear during the Umayyads’ presence in Mecca?! And why specifically the Falcon of Quraysh, and not the Lion of Quraysh, for example?! Why was he given this name and not called by another name, and what is the significance of this title?!
● History books described Abd al-Rahman al-Dakhel as being blond, tall, thin, one-eyed, with a long nose and two braids.
One-eyed falcon?!
This description is completely similar to what the West translated from Egyptian inscriptions, and the West’s imagination that it drew of the character of the Allah Horus and wrote for us the story of the Allah (Horus), who was in the form of a falcon…and the Allah (Horus) fought a battle with the Allah (Set), and rose up. In it (Set) gouged out one of (Horus’) eyes, after which he became one-eyed.
Abd al-Rahman (the Quraish falcon)… He was one-eyed and sluggish (long-nosed) and had two braids. The one-eyed Hawar (falcon) had the (short) beak and had two braids. The Allah Horus (the falcon) was symbolized by the disk of the sun, and he is said to be the son of the sun Allah, and Abd al-Rahman al-Dakhil (the falcon of Quraish) is from the descendants of Abd Shams.
The feminine form of the name Hoor (the falcon) will be Hawraa… Did you know that the wife of Abd al-Rahman al-Dakhil (the hawk of Quraish) (Hur) was named Hawraa?!
According to translated logic
Which Western texts were extracted from Egyptian inscriptions? The writer of the story (Saqr Quraish) chose Hur (Horus) as his wife, and chose the feminine form of the word (Hoor) for her, which is Hawra.
This similarity between the Falcon of Quraish and Horus Champollion in the descriptions confirms that this name appeared in that period, and the novel of the Falcon of Quraish was written in that period, and the magical world of Horus that the West wrote was embodied with the character……. As a popular hero who emerged from the geography of Mecca, intended to be the center of the region, the hero who carried out conquests.
■ Also, this proven result makes us oppose the words of an Iraqi friend that I read in a post of his, and I hope that he will not be angry with him.
When he said in it that the phrase: (The sign is sufficient for Al-Hurr) is an inherited saying that is considered a common example in speech, and it is originally one of the remnants of the Umayyad and Abbasid states in our history, and it targeted a distinguished figure among the supporters and companions of Imam Hussein, peace be upon him, who is (Al-Hurr ibn Riyah).
Not true at all
Because (the free bird is sufficient for a sign) is an authentic Arabic proverb…and it does not mean the character of a man, but rather it means (the free bird), because the free bird actually understands by pointing…that is, the sign is sufficient for it to do the work that its owner asks of it.
Because the free bird was closely linked to the inhabitants of the region, like the rest of the other animals, horses and camels, and this connection produced proverbs, sayings and descriptions, and people here even borrowed its name as nicknames and names for themselves.
And from this connection between man and his surroundings… the Western project, through the Ottomans, created many imaginary stories and novels… stories that contain many names and words from the environment of the region that are on people’s tongues… so that people’s connection to those imaginary stories increases, because the names of the stories are present. In the environment, and that is why our people find it difficult to get out of those stories that did not happen, and he did not stop at this thing…but he placed within those stories a large number of distorted and inverted names from the names on the lips of the residents of the region, to confuse their tongue and create a distorted awareness. Wrong.
This point makes us go to the topic of (Al-Hurr bin Riyah), because our friend and brother from Iraq wrote a topic… that is related to a topic that occupies everyone about the direction of the qibla in ancient mosques, and in it he talked about the qibla of the mosque that contains the grave of (Al-Hurr bin Riyah) and that it is It is heading towards the grave of Imam Hussein, not towards Mecca.
I postponed commenting on it until it was answered in this article.
Firstly …. Al-Horr Bin Riah Mosque…it looks very modern, a very modern architectural style.
Secondly… Does it make sense that a person was killed in the same battle with Imam Hussein… then you assume in advance that his grave must be towards the grave of Imam Hussein, and that the man must choose his mosque in a direction that has not yet been determined… because he was killed in the same battle.
If Al-Hurr bin Riyah was killed long after Imam Hussein, it would be logical if we said that he wanted his grave to be similar to the grave of Hussein.
The story is very modern and is as old as Napoleon
Why ?
Notice how this name (Al-Hurr bin Riyah)… is as if it were a name for the Al-Hurr bird that flies with the wind. The Al-Hurr bird was attributed to the winds, the son of the winds… so the name came (Al-Hurr bin Riyah).
Or he could have been called (Al-Hurr bin Al-Samaa) or (Al-Hurr bin Tayaran), etc
Also note… (Al-Hurr bin Riyah) was one of the supporters and companions of Imam Hussein… The story of Imam Ali and Imam Hussein and their struggle with (Muawiyah and Yazid), is completely similar to the story of Horus (Al-Hurr) in his struggle with Set (the dog – Al-Awi = Muawiyah), which the West extracted from Egyptian inscriptions.
The evidence that always points to that period throughout the region is the age of Napoleon.
According to contemporary history, the tomb of Al-Hurr ibn Riyah…is one of the discoveries of the Safavid dynasty, and its first restoration was in approximately the year 1800 by a dynasty of the Qajar Turks…and I believe that it was not a restoration, but rather the first construction of it…the beginning of the construction of buildings in the region… To embody the narrative that will be published and become people’s awareness.
Because the Torah is the oldest written script in the region, the project made distorted, forged, and magical Greek translations of its texts, then composed popular Arabic stories similar to them with various and multiple names. Even if we read his fake translations, we believe that these stories have an ancient origin, that is, they are an authentic heritage. . In fact, no one in Iraq knew the story of a person named Al-Hurr bin Riyah 300 years ago at all.
Because most of the buildings in the area that have the names of characters present in the story of Mecca…it is a plan to embody their fictitious historical story of the new center of Mecca in reality…so that it is difficult for people to get out of that story.
{And We made an inheritance to the people who were oppressed, the easts and the wests of the land which We had blessed, and Your Allah’s good word was fulfilled upon the children of Israel because they were patient, and We destroyed what Pharaon and his people were doing, and what they used to ascend}
If a sign is sufficient for a free person, then a verse is sufficient for a believer.
—————————–
Because the article is related to the bird of heat, I remembered the verses of my popular poetry, which I always heard from the mouth of a neighbor of mine, and I wanted to mention them to you here:
O Allah, you who are on the throne, you are exalted, and you know everything that your servant intends.
Creator, and after you are created, you are sufficient for Muslim and unbeliever, and He provided for them alike.
You are the one who pardoned the servant’s mistakes and preserved the birds in the air
—————————–
{Our Allah, and send among them a messenger of their own who will recite to them Your verses and teach them the Book and wisdom and purify them. Indeed, You are the Mighty, the Wise. (129) And whoever turns away from the religion of Ibrahim except he who fools himself, and We have certainly chosen him in this world, and in the Hereafter he will be among the righteous.}
I know that many people want to know the rest of the verses…the male servant and the female, and the interpretation of the rest of the text (Whoever is pardoned from his brother in any way, then follow what is right and pay back to him with goodness. That is an alleviation from your Allah and a mercy. But whoever transgresses after that will have a painful punishment.)
But, Allah willing, in another article