Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 8:17 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
WHo is "The Pharaoh" in the Muslim Holy Book
#1
WHo is "The Pharaoh" in the Muslim Holy Book
   Although I am not that knowledgeable on such issues and I don’t even count as an especially religious individual (I don’t do the fasting in Ramadan and I didn’t attend Friday prayers since several years now, but I still remain within the definition of a believer accordingly with the five basic principles of Islam according to its traditional definition), I do have some basic knowledge on some basic issues (that come from my personal connections and some amount of literature I have been reading) and I decided not to leave the interpretation of this issue to some more traditional religious thinkers and to share my own thoughts on the issue.
 
   Actually I happen to have a B.A. in Archaeology and Egyptian Archaeology used to be one of my favorite classes at the time. I also have a great collection of the books of the French Egyptologist and historical novel writer Christian Jacq.
 
   The Muslim Holy Book mentions the world pharaoh about 74 times and does so in a quite negative manner. And from the biblical quotation of the name Ramses, and from the reference in the Quran that says “Did you not see that rivers are flowing under my feet?” (This is a clear reference to the Temple of Ramses II at Abu Simbel that was erected at the boundary with the Kingdom of Nubia at the time that was entirely dedicated to the worship of Pharaoh and his wife Nefertari). Also a verse in the Quran says “We drowned his army but preserved his body because he decided to repent at the last moment”. And this explains that the Mummy the Ramses II could be mummified at an old age and he seems to have died from tooth infection rather having drowned in the red sea while chasing the Jews who were fleeing his rule. The book series called “Ramses” also features a confrontation between the prophet Moses and Ramses II but does so in a more unbiased way. In fact Chistian Jacq describes ancient Egypt as an advanced culture that we could describe as a state that embraces the rule of law.
 
   So I am pondering why is the pharaoh depicted as such a theocratic / despotic entity despite all the scientific data? There is another writer called Joseph Selbie who comes from one of the serious lines of Gurus of the Yogic tradition. His idea is that at the time of the rule of Ramses II (1279-1213 BC) Egypt was in a state of moral, spiritual and religious regression and increasing corruption in its political, social and religious structure. So maybe Ramses II was a little like Augustus in Rome or Suleiman the Magnificent in the Ottoman Empire. He was a figure of stability and successful governance in an overall period of political regression and increasing social oppression that is due to the way of governance being increasingly based on brutal power and oppression rather than higher ideals, rule of law and widespread acceptance of religious and political power by the general population. Another possibility is that (just like it is mentioned in the holy book Yunus 52: 90-92) The Pharaoh who saw his army drowning in the Red Sea decided to abandon his egocentric / megalomaniac way of living and truly became a wise King like King Solomon in the remaining period of his life.
 
   The reason why I give Credit to this theory is that Ramses II was more or less the last truly great king of Egypt. He dies at 1213 BC and his Son or Grandson battles the famous “Seas Peoples” whose arrival mean the end of the Hittites, the Assyrians and almost all great powers of the time in the Near-East. There are no Great achievements of the Egyptian Culture after that Era and in the 8th century they are conquered by Assyrians, Persians and then by the Greeks and finally by the Romans in the 1st century BC.   
 
   Also Tutankhamun who was the Son of the “heretic” king Akhenaten was a predecessor of Ramses II. Akhenaten wanted to diminish the power of the religious clergy by adopting a single God religion that placed him at the center of religious and political life. Than palace conspiracies happened (his wife Nefertiti [1379-1362 BC] even asked help from the Hittites in order to avoid being married to the King’s Scribe Penthu who wanted to become the Pharaoh after Akhenaten). So base don this we can speculate that at least the second half of the New Kingdom (1550-1069 BC) was rather a period of regression for the Egyptian culture as a whole and it is therefore possible that the “pharaoh” as described in the Quran is one of the earliest example of theocratic rule that continued to plague the world as a whole.
 
   Theocratic rule in the West Ends with the French and American Revolutions. In my country it ends with the declaration of independence in 1923. In many middle-eastern countries it is still highly present. Even in places like India and Brazil, we are witnessing the arrival of some populist leaders who seem to be willing to promote a theocratic way of governance. So as it is said by many scholars, the pharaoh (although he is probably a real historical person) is rather an archetype of theocratic dictatorship rather than a personalized evil person.
 
   The reason why I wanted to post this thread is because I want to bring this debated to the issue of abortion. The reason for this is that the pharaoh in the Muslim holy book is a creature that controls the belief of others (he asks “Did you believe him (Moses) without my permission?), he does proclaim his own divinity, he creates conspiracies to attain his aims, he is surrounded and supported by the wealthy class and the clergy, He does not produce good by his own effort, He rather takes what has been produced by others by force an than likes to display this “power” by displaying his wealth, He is the one who creates “corruption on earth” yet he blames Moses of creating discord in his empire, He denies scientific / rational / evidence that is possible to demonstrate by scientific means in favor of “what has been taught to us by our ancestors” (He is the “conservative” type, Moses is the “revolutionary” type), He values brutal force rather than hard work and scientific evidence (Ar. Kudret vs. Huccet), his reliance on military power is emphasized in many places, Religion is one of his man tools to fool the people (Ex. Lukman 33, FAtir 5, Hadid 14 “May those who deceive you not deceive you with God”), He opposes freedom of religion (he asks “Did you believe him without my permission?”) He opposes secularism (Because he is a God-King, Just like Augustus). While King Solomon is depicted as a king who has respect even for the ants while his army moves from one place to another, the pharaoh is like the antonym for that who “Represses the people, and the people obeyed him”. The “magic” that is performed by “the magicians” of the pharaoh is interpreted by modern scholars as “propaganda” or “fake news” or “mass hypnosis” of the population. And the miracles of the prophet Moses are described as “magic” by the entourage of the pharaoh. Because theocratic rule does not believe in “truth” theocratic rule believes in “magic” and “magicians” that is: Propaganda, brainwashing, disinformation, palace conspiracies, mass hypnosis and permanent lies (that are based on religion) that are designed to manipulate the masses. And the staff and “white hand” displayed by Moses probably represents truth and scientific evidence that dissipates all the lies and false propaganda…
 
   And the issue of abortions also appears as an important theme here. See, methods of contraception were based on herbal medicine and rudimentary at best in Ancient Egypt. The Egyptians had a good medical system but it was nothing similar to our modern medicine. So there was no methods of abortion at the time of Ramses II. Yet the Quran describes him as someone who “divided the people into different classes of people” and than “maintained a hand on the uterus of the female population”. This cannot mean that there were forced abortions in Ancient Egypt. This can only mean the opposite: The pharaoh wanted as many children as possible and he was opposed to contraception. And modern pharaohs also, don’t like the idea of women having a right of decision over their own bodies so even in Europe, they try to do the best they can, to make it almost impossible for each and every woman to get an abortion in a safe / state-approved clinic.
 

   Also: Jagadish Vasudev (Sadhguru) who is a great Yogi of India, indicate that in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy “the soul” or “life itself” is in the process of experimenting with the womb. So the life there, isn’t yet a true / permanent life. Yet Sadhguru is still critical of the issue and say (after saying that it’s the woman’s decision only) that this should not be done without a feeling of responsibility and should not be seen as an ordinary and simple medical procedure either (after all it’s not an aesthetical procedure, it’s still a life and one shouldn’t be totally irresponsible about such decisions either).
  

   So again, the story of the pharaoh being an allegory for a typical / fanatical theocratic ruler, these theocratic rulers like to “maintain their hand on the female uterus” and to control the female body just like they like the control the mind of the population as a whole. Verses in the Quran seem to indicate that these rulers like to give awards to their supporters while reserving severe punishments to their opponents and accusing anyone who opposes their ideas of “being magicians” or “willing to create corruption in his kingdom or –corruption on earth – “. Like using the media a tool to discredit all views that go against their ways of seeing things or to say that these people are involved in conspiracies etc… They seem to like division too (as in “divide e domine”). They like to create factions within society, they like polarization. They also like sectarianism. The Quran says “do not be divided among yourselves” (“do not follow sectarian leaders” – There has to be one God and one prophet). Yet the Pharaoh loves divisions. So all theocratic rules (like those of Ottoman Sultans for instance) have promoted sectarianism until it was banned in the new Turkish Republic in 1923. “Zulum” (oppression) and “israf” (extravagance) is their typical nature. They “take thing that were produced by hard work through brutal force” and than use it “to display their wealth”. In some schools of Islam, this phase (also described as “emmare”) is the lowest state of the human ego. In this state the Ego is unable of self-criticism, believes in the quasi-divine state of itself, it does not respect reason or scientific evidence, it knowns no boundary and is ready to do all sorts of harm on others because it believes in its own supremacy. As a religious book, these parts of the Quran are warning us against the extremes that could be displayed by our own egos if we were to surrender to its entirely material perception of the world rather than always remaining open to scientific evidence and a more philosophical way of seeing things. (or having the Ego “surrendered” to what is spiritual in us as it is described by Yogis).
Reply
#2
RE: WHo is "The Pharaoh" in the Muslim Holy Book
Exodus diverges into a family record of the sons of Levi:

Gershon, Kohath, Merari, and Levi died at the age of 137 years.

Korath begat Amram, who married his aunt Jochebed, and Korath died at the age of 133 years.

Amram was the father of Aaron and Moses, before he died at the age of 137 years.

Even considering that Moses was eighty years old at this time, there are not enough generations listed to fill the 430 years between the time Levi moved to Egypt with his father Jacob and the Exodus. That 430 years is called out in Exodus 12:40. The forefathers of Moses would have each had to have lived at least 180 years to make the math work.

So the exodus story is pure fiction slapped together from assorted scrolls by scribes on the Babylonian Vacation with a lot of filler material they made up on the spot, and a shitty editor who flunked fifth grade math. So Pharaoh could have been Yul Brenner for all it matters.
Reply
#3
RE: WHo is "The Pharaoh" in the Muslim Holy Book
So much to unpack. The first being an item of historic interest. Egypt had access to contraceptives and abortifacients. One, in particular, so effective and so popular that romans described it as having been worth it's weight in gold, which is widely believed to have been driven to extinction by over-consumption and lack of suitable habitat (or methods) for wider cultivation. I mention this because the thrust of your post is to suggest that the story in magic book is a sort of cautionary tale, so there's one for us.

As to that idea, it's hard to disagree in the broad strokes that it's a cautionary tale not related to actual historical detail - but it's certainly not a cautionary tale about the dangers of theocracy or division, as magic book insists there must be a theocracy (as you yourself note, parathenticaly) and implores its audience to divide themselves and fall within it's own camp rather than that of the various pagans in it's own much later time. In genera, I'm inclined to write off problems of historic detail on that basis alone, it was too long ago and the authors of magic book just didn't know much about the past - and..besides, they had a message to convey which would be more important than getting any details right, particularly since no one in their audience would have been able to correct them, anyway. I did like your idea about the magic of the egyptians and moses as a propaganda battle, which is absolutely what the story is, though I think it's more likely that this is just a riff on the wizard battle in the OT that Moses wins than a comment on some propaganda battle that happened then, as opposed to happening right there on the page and, for the most part, working - and even working on you despite your modern skepticism and urge to translate it into something less..well....wizardy.

Ultimately, I think you've got it right. Pharaoh, whether it's the one in old magic book or new new magic book, isn't a who so much as a what. An archetype, a foil, the villain of a story, the thing set up to fail and, in the process, to describe what the authors saw as a current evil in their own times through allegorical retelling...though, probably not what you see today, as they were definitely a different breed of believer than yourself, living in a different time.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#4
RE: WHo is "The Pharaoh" in the Muslim Holy Book
Lİnuxgal:
- Yes and the world is not 6000 years old either. But on the Age of these prophets. I have a theory (as crazy as it seems). We are currently witnessing an extension of our average age from about 30 to 40 years toward 100 years in most developed countries. One theory states that in earlier ages (whose existence is currently pure speculation) people used to have greater spiritual knowledge and were therefore able to extent their lifespan to almost 300 years. (I don’t really believe it myself, but I do consider it as a possibility).
 
I don’t have a tangible proof for the exodus. Yet in the Quran the pharaoh says in Zuhruf 51,53 “Don’t you see that these rivers are flowing from under my feet?”

[Image: statues-entrance-Ramses-II-Great-Temple-Aswan.jpg]

As I have said before archaeological correlations are quite rare in religious issues. But why would the Bible and the Quran refer to the exodus if it was pure fiction? I think there is a strong chance the event truly happened and I think it happened during the early reign of Ramses II.
 
Grand Nudger: According to the book I am reading, it is the prophet himself who said that after him, true religious leadership (also known as the kalifate – not ISIL kalifate what I am referring to is Islamic terminology - ) would go on only about 30 years. And just as he prophesized, the prophet dies in 632. There was 4 caliphate (as truly religious leaders) who succeeded him. Than in 661 his son in law Ali was assassinated. Than the son of Ali was murdered with all his followers in the Karbala event in 680 (but this is secondary information). And than the word “caliphate” became synonymous with “Sultan” (Whose original meaning was something like “divine evidence”) and became the ownership of whoever was strong enough to claim it. This is why many Muslim scholars refer to all the “caliph’s” who came after Ali as “Meliki-Adud” (kingdom of oppressors).
   But this is the purely intellectual approach. I am a part of those who believe that perhaps not all the messages of holy books is meant to be understood by all the readers at any given time. I don’t know if the creation of a secular state with high moral values would haven truly realistic in the 7th century AD. One possibility is that each generation has to reinterpret the original message according with the existing realities of its time. (or that’s my theory).
 
On Moses: The magicians see him as a usurper who wants the riches of the Nile and they secretly tell the pharaoh “this is a great magician” (hypnotist, liar, propagandist) who only aims to conquer the worldly possessions of the pharaoh (because the pharaoh says in one place “Am I not greater than him? Why didn’t his God give him any worldly riches and power if he is as great as he is?” And before the 7 curses of Egypt (plague, famine, frogs etc…) Moses prays to God and say “Extingish the wealth and worldly power of the Pharaoh”. Because The Pharaoh has convictions but has no spiritual understanding. He perceives greatness in wealth, military power and magic (power to fool and manipulate the masses). And Moses is been given two miracles on is is shiny white hand that he pulls out of his clothes (I don’t know if this one is present in the Biblical version). This is just like the white hand of truth prevailing over the darkness of lies and the second is (as you know) His stick who devours the serpents of the magician (like the truth devouring lies when it is clearly being demonstrated to even the strongest believers in lies).
   But I agree with you. The story might also be purely allegorical. Intellectuals say that it is the message that is being conveyed matters rather than historical correlations. The first message is just my theory.
 
And here is an example of my theory. (A’Raf 35/7) 141 says: “….They (the pharaoh and his entourage) were killing your boys, were maintaining a hand on the body of your women….”
 
I said that the meaning of this verse cannot be birth control or even contraception. Because if I am correct and the story is taking place in the 13th century BC. There were only very limited methods of contraception at the time whose effect were only partial. Even condoms made of animal digestive systems did not appear before the 1700’s (of our era). There are records of abortion practices in antiquity in wikipedia but the same page is saying that abortions in hospital environments in the early 1800’s had a death rate of 30%. Truly efficient medical procedures didn’t start (in the developed world) before the end of the 19th century. Abortion pills were not invented before the 1930’s and real methods of contraception (like contraception pills) were only commercialize din the 60’s and 70’s.
So what is the pharaohs hand doing on the body of women?
- I think that the holy book is telling us that “conservative / theocratic rulers want as many children as possible. They don’t like the very idea that women can have control over their own bodies. And they want absolute control over male and female bodies just as they have control over male and female minds”
(Taha 45/20- Verses 71-73): “The pharaoh said: “Did you dare to believe (this magician = Moses) without first asking for my permission?... I will cut you hand and your feet and hang you on a date tree. Then you will know whose punishment is greater His (God’s) or mine…”
 
I cannot explain the pharaoh having a hand on the female uterus in another way (because the same thing is being mentioned in one or two other places). He is said to be treating women badly and to do inappropriate things to them. Yet “having a hand on the female body” is probably to be interpreted literally: “He has a hand on the female body” as in “controlling the female body in order to control society as a whole”.
 
One modern example of this from the 25th of November:


https://www.duvarenglish.com/police-crack-down-on-womens-rights-marches-in-turkey-news-61574

One modern example of this from the 25th of November:

 
- Similar scenes were repeated today. In the second video on the website on female demonstrator is heard yelling “Why won’t you let us pass? What could we possibly do to you?”
 
What do you think he would say if I asked “The Great One” “What could those women do to you? Why won’t you let them march for their right to live (basically)?”
 
Simple: Theocratic leaders don’t like the idea. They have (and have always had) this obsession with the female body and they cannot leave it alone on its own. Smile
Reply
#5
RE: WHo is "The Pharaoh" in the Muslim Holy Book
Last comment by Grandnudger:
- Probably yes. Because in early Mesopotamian history the grain of early city states were being stored in the main temple of the city. And the Lugal (King) was closely related to the Ensi (high-priest) of the temple. This scheme was maintained until the end of the Bronze Age. In fact my teacher repeated many times that there was no difference between religious life and daily life in Bronze-age societies. Also Hittite texts usually say something like “He has joined the Gods” and/or “he became a God” when they talk about a deceased king.

So maybe this was simply how things were done at the time. We might not know for sure. But in the Quranic depiction of the event there is a reference to “being deceived using God” wich is described as a serious offence against God and mankind as a whole. And there are many other element like “corruption on earth” (which is used with a meaning that is the opposite of what the protesters in Iran are being accused by the regime of doing), conspiracy, use of propaganda and lies and division to subvert the masses, being a megalomaniac being who exceeds the limits of human condition, taking the production and intellectual ownership and everything of value from others by using brutal power and military might, denying truth that come through reason and/or tangible evidence etc. etc.

So the book is clearly making an archetypical description here. Like a symbol of the human Ego in its most extreme form.

So back to our subject: You may compare this with the Book of Lao-tse if you want. I made this comparison because that book is quite short. Yet if you dedicate some time to it. You might uncover “things”. (Like the perfect description of Mr. Beautyfull Moustache written 1400 years ago) Smile
Reply
#6
RE: WHo is "The Pharaoh" in the Muslim Holy Book
The above, again, strongly suggests that you've mistaken a continuation or variant of a phenomena you believe to be political poison...for it's antidote. The creation of a progressive secular state may or may not have been possible in the 7th century middle east..... but that's neither here nor there, really, since it's manifestly clear that the people who wrote new new magic book had no such intentions.

Perhaps you could understand a pharaoh having hands on wombs as an expression of how a foreign oppressor had taken their women, one way or another, which is a recurring fear of ethnocentric ideologies all the world over, and at all times? I still enjoy your revisionist islam more than the good old timey stuff, but it's pretty apparent that you're applying a contemporary filter. As you put it, reinterpreting the message - a problematic concept for any number of reasons - but..I think, necessary, given the quality of those "truths" revealed to witchdoctors and warlords centuries ago. In a roundabout way, I think it's on-brand for abrahamism, as islam is a revision of a revision, which was a revision of some wholly different belief system itself. Perhaps, if it weren't so difficult for the faithful to apply white-out to their foundational texts, then abrahamism would not have lagged so far behind in progressive thought - and the gap between what is traditional or historic and what you believe would not be so wide?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#7
RE: WHo is "The Pharaoh" in the Muslim Holy Book
(November 27, 2022 at 4:02 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: The above, again, strongly suggests that you've mistaken a continuation or variant of a phenomena you believe to be political poison...for it's antidote.  The creation of a progressive secular state may or may not have been possible in the 7th century middle east..... but that's neither here nor there, really, since it's manifestly clear that the people who wrote new new magic book had no such intentions.

Perhaps you could understand a pharaoh having hands on wombs as an expression of how a foreign oppressor had taken their women, one way or another, which is a recurring fear of ethnocentric ideologies all the world over, and at all times?  I still enjoy your revisionist islam more than the good old timey stuff, but it's pretty apparent that you're applying a contemporary filter.  As you put it, reinterpreting the message - a problematic concept for any number of reasons - but..I think, necessary, given the quality of those "truths" revealed to witchdoctors and warlords centuries ago.  In a roundabout way, I think it's on-brand for abrahamism, as islam is a revision of a revision, which was a revision of some wholly different belief system itself.  Perhaps, if it weren't so difficult for the faithful to apply white-out to their foundational texts, then abrahamism would not have lagged so far behind in progressive thought - and the gap between what is traditional or historic and what you believe would not be so wide?

1) There was a scholar called Abu Hannifa (699-799) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Hanifa) who overtly opposed the İdeology of the new “caliphate” (that came after for 4 true caliphs described above) Muawiya I (661-680 AD - Founder of the first Umayah Caliphate). But what was done was done and just like in the story of the Crucifixion of Jesus, the “spiritual” message remained ununderstood by the majority of people and Just like Constantine’s “One Church – One Emperor” doctrine this “caliph” and all his followers started to distort and use the original message of the Holy Book the way they liked.
 
   But from my readings I can still affirm that there might be a will to perhaps convey the message, even if it is only understood by a minority of people at first, so that with the ages coming and going, a road is being paved for future generations. Like the rights of black people in the US. First there is Independence and the adoption of the bill of human rights as the American constitution. Than there is the abolishment of slavery. Than the end of racial segregation. And today the fight is still going on with the “black lives matter” movement. So maybe it’s a process of reconnection with our true nature that begins in an age were the only rule is the survival of the fittest that slowly evolves and grows into something that aids mankind in its quest for more reason and more equality and greater connection with its inner nature in this world. (Or that’s how I see it).
 
2) That’s one of the key points I mentioned in my previous posts. The pharaoh likes divisions. Different faiths, different ethnicities, different social classes, (today) supporters of different ideologies. He likes polarizations, he likes racial struggles. If he hated the Jews (As in the Hitler Example) why wouldn’t he let them go? All they wanted was to leave.
 
+ If I am not wrong, it was the prophet Abraham who had let the Jews into Egypt because of a famine in the Land of Canaan (as it is described in the “Exodus” part of the Bible) and their status was that of refugees rather than slaves. And the story of Moses is said to be happening 500 years after that.
 
I’m not a revisionist or anything at all. “Deist” is the best term if you prefer. See Lao Tse and the Prophet Muhammad are both said to be very advanced spiritual beings to whom those messages were “dictated” while there were in a connected state with what I would call “The Higher Reality”. I simply happen to believe in this “Higher Reality”. So I don’t know to what –ism I belong to Smile
 
   Yet in the books that I read it says that God “Does not like divisions” (unlike the pharaoh who “divides the people into factions”) and God Says in the Quran “Do not be divided among yourselves into factions”. This means Gods is against religious sects. And this means God is against the Idea of “a chosen people”
 
   This being said. I can tell that as the situation in Egypt became oppressive and Tyrannical, Moses and his Brother were ordered to go there to “warn” the pharaoh. Than the famous story happened.
   I simply happen to agree that science and philosophy should be our primary guide in understanding ourselves and the Universe. Simply because there is a method to follow and that in science you are not allowed to say anything to anyone without tangible elements or real foundations to whatever theory you are promoting. Religion is a separate area of activity. It is and has to be individual (not social) and there happens to be an inner process at work (whether you are being deceived by yourself or others or not). There is a whole process of spiritual growth that is being measured in lifetimes in Eastern religions. And technically, even Kim Yon Un in in a process of spiritual growth (which is the reason I would prefer not to be in his shoes).
 
   So it’s a different system of thought if you like. In today’s world at least, it’s no longer an ideology that is contrary to the ideology of atheism and is opposed to all other books and interpretations etc. etc. It’s more like an understanding on the spiritual level and the Holy Book itself serves as a tool to fulfill that goal. But no-one says it is and can only be the only tool. You’d need some degree of involvement to even understand what I’m talking about. But all I can say is: It’s not one mythology vs. another mythology anymore. These thought forms have already collapsed. It’s about personal understanding (and gain) on an individual level. That’s how I would describe it.
Reply
#8
RE: WHo is "The Pharaoh" in the Muslim Holy Book
(November 27, 2022 at 3:37 pm)Leonardo17 Wrote:  But why would the Bible and the Quran refer to the exodus if it was pure fiction? 
(November 28, 2022 at 11:04 am)Leonardo17 Wrote:  
 If he hated the Jews (As in the Hitler Example) why wouldn’t he let them go? All they wanted was to leave.

The answer to both of these questions is the same - and yes, it's pure fiction.  Imagine how dismissive it was for us to believe that jewish slaves created the pyramids, for example - since you're into ditching silly shit like that. The whole bit was just a story, and whatever problems that creates for whatever beliefs you hold about gods or prophets or magic books, is..I suppose, a problem you'll have to address one day. I actually don't see why it's a sticking point for you, given your willingess to tweak the narrative to suit.

There is no "ideology of atheism", lol.  OFC you're a revisionist, as you're revising magic books and islamic history in real time right before our eyes.  You probably grew up with that term as a pejorative but, if it helps, I use it descriptively, and think that revision is necessary if these belief sets are to survive in any form for much longer. It's becoming very difficult for people with "spiritual understandings" to assert them as they are, as evidenced by your insistence, for example, that they are consistent with "atheist ideology".
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#9
RE: WHo is "The Pharaoh" in the Muslim Holy Book
(November 28, 2022 at 11:25 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote:
(November 27, 2022 at 3:37 pm)Leonardo17 Wrote:  But why would the Bible and the Quran refer to the exodus if it was pure fiction? 
(November 28, 2022 at 11:04 am)Leonardo17 Wrote:  
 If he hated the Jews (As in the Hitler Example) why wouldn’t he let them go? All they wanted was to leave.

The answer to both of these questions is the same - and yes, it's pure fiction.  Imagine how dismissive it was for us to believe that jewish slaves created the pyramids, for example - since you're into ditching silly shit like that.  The whole bit was just a story, and whatever problems that creates for whatever beliefs you hold about gods or prophets or magic books, is..I suppose, a problem you'll have to address one day.  I actually don't see why it's a sticking point for you, given your willingess to tweak the narrative to suit.

There is no "ideology of atheism", lol.  OFC you're a revisionist, as you're revising magic books and islamic history in real time right before our eyes.  You probably grew up with that term as a pejorative but, if it helps, I use it descriptively, and think that revision is necessary if these belief sets are to survive in any form for much longer.  It's becoming very difficult for people with "spiritual understandings" to assert them as they are, as evidenced by your insistence, for example, that they are consistent with "atheist ideology".
1) The pyramids were built in the Old-Kingdom of Egypt at about 2600 BC. The story between Ramses II and Moses Happened at about 1250 BC. And according to the Bible, The Jews first came to Egypt 500 years before Moses (That puts us to the second intermediate period 1650-1550 BC).
 
   And 1) The Jews were refugees of famine (according to the Bible) not slaves and 2. The Old Kingdom of Egypt is something totally different. This is the age I was talking about previously in which the Egyptians had a truly working and realistic pantheon of God and an impressive amount of spiritual as well as occult knowledge. No pyramids were built at the time of Ramses II. In that era they used rock tombs that were hidden in the Famous Valley of Kings.
 
   The Pyramids of the Old Kingdom on the other hand were built by regular Egyptian workers who were drafted (as in a military service) every year at the time when the Nile would rise and the farmers basically had nothing to do. And they were paid, they were well fed, they had beer, they had doctors and they even had some sort of social security.
 
   This Hollywood-based error comes probably from the Roman civilization whose economy was almost entirely based on Slave labor.
 
    In the Old-Kingdom and in the Middle Kingdom of Egypt (and probably in the most part of the New-Kingdom) there was something called “the Law of Maat” in Egypt. That’s the idea of the supremacy of law according to which no one (not even the Pharaoh) was above the rule of law. And in that Era (before the downfall period that became clearly visible toward the 12th century BC) women were socially enabled. Unlike the Roman or the contemporary Hittite society for instance, they were almost equal to men in terms of legal rights. In fact the Pharaoh and the Queen ruled the country together (unlike the depictions of Queen Nefertiti who is represented at the temple of Abu-Simbel as being 1/8th the size of the pharaoh Ramses II).
 
   And I am not going to speculate on the status of Jews in Egypt. I only know that they first came in as refugees.
 
2) There is no sticking point. As I said I don’t know a lot about religion. I can’t really “define” religion for you. But all I am saying is that I know enough to recognize very quickly what is not religion. And I am using this allegorical story that is present in both the Muslim and Christian holy book to attempt to make a description of something that may look like religion but actually has nothing to do with religion itself (not with the original – intended message at least) Smile
 
3) You may be right. This is true. I thought you said something like “reformist”. I can’t be a reformist because I believe the original message of the “magic book” as you put it is available for everyone in the world and there is no need for a “reform” on that. But Yes, I am a revisionist. In fact this is happening in many religions. I read a lot about Hinduism too. Again, since the 19th century there are some Yogis (or scholars if you like) who are clearly “revising” the already existing teaching and are making them more understandable and more logical and more usable for all of us who believe in such things. So that’s my mistake. Ok.
 
4) That I don’t know. I mean I am a theist. Not only I believe in the existence of God as the original cause of creation but I also believe that what I would call “our inner nature” (unlike our Ego) is one and the same with this “Ultimate Being” (Because this is the statement that is being made in many mystic traditions all over the world). So that’s my belief system. But I also happen to know people who happen to be within the same “belief system” who are saying that “atheism is still the best possible approach”. That’s because as the thinker Eckhart Tolle Puts it: Whenever you try to define God, or you try to name him (or it) you are putting limits to something that is without limits. So we also have a problem of definition here. If I was to say “I am a theist” (which I already did Smile ) Than who or what is this “Supreme Being”. That’s when I have to say one has to look for himself / herself. Because although it an intelligible phenomenon, mystics say it can only be known by direct experience.
 
   So you sort of made me agree that I fall more into the definition of revisionist Islam rather than theism. “Islam” means the surrendering of the Ego to the Supreme Being. Just like the Buddha’s way of surrendering the fake identity (the Ego) to our Higher Self.
 
   I don’t know if we should go deeper into these subjects. But that’s more or less it. And I am not an authority on these issues either. But if you go to any bookstore, I think we are in an age in which all the information on these issues is already made highly available to all of us. And this is unprecedented. In ancient times books used to be the luxury of powerful aristocrats of wealthy monasteries. Even in the libraries of antiquity you had to be “someone” in order to enter these places and access these scrolls or teachings. And the teachings we are talking about came during that era. This might be the reason why they seem rather fictional or enigmatic to us. All I am saying is that they are not so enigmatic. I think they do include some clear “elements” in them if you have enough time to study them carefully and thoroughly.
Reply
#10
RE: WHo is "The Pharaoh" in the Muslim Holy Book
That's not a hollywood error my dude. It's in the Torah. We know that the nonsense in your own magic book is wrong because whomever the hell they thought they were talking about drowned..but we have Ramses mummy, and he didn't drown, futhermore, he was nearly ninety when he didn't drown. Imagine a ninety year old man with an infected jaw and severe arthritis chasing some runaways in a chariot. Then, ofc, there's the tiny detail that there simply was no exodus. Additionally his successor had to put down a canaanite rebellion, which wouldn't be any sort of thing had the runaways crushed them and taken their lands already.

None of this stops people from deriving meaning from the stories. The exodus is a more central feature of african american christianity than it is for white american christianity, as an example. You're in luck with respect to not knowing much about religion. There are people here on the boards who know quite a bit - either from experience in those religions or from having studied the subject as an item of interest rather than an assertion to facts (historic or otherwise). So, perhaps, the constant "if you only studied them" is out of place? Perhaps it's you who needs to study these things a bit more? This story is in your own magic book because it was in someone elses, and the originators of your own religion took it from them, credulously replicating their errors, as they did in many other places with the many other pieces of other traditions which were cobbled together to form your own. This a dry reading of a literary fact of the construction of the quran - but - when you read it you feel compelled to reject it.

Perhaps, you should explore that, as a revisionist. Is it necessary to place yourself and the foundations for your modified beliefs in contradiction to mere reality? Mind you, there's no right or wrong answer to this question in a vacuum. It may very well be the case that it is required in order for you to maintain whatever belief compels you to reject fact in favor of fiction. I often find that I have to close my eyes and cover my ears in order to maintain the belief that human beings are fundamentally good and decent, which forms a central part of the closest thing to a religion that I myself possess. Because, if this were not true, then at least some of the things I believe about the nature of a good life, what we must do and cannot do, are not strictly true. This knowledge, this recognition, alone..imo, keeps my privately held beliefs that much more honest and grounded than they would be should I spend that same time or effort in a futile bid to reject those parts of reality which are discomforting to the ideology I -do- hold. FWIW, I think that makes it more resilient and compelling, as well. These are things which would seem to interest you, by your comments about the changing face of islam as you see it.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
Exclamation Warning:You are in danger. Non-Muslim in danger! AVMXF 67 4966 July 23, 2023 at 3:07 pm
Last Post: arewethereyet
  LGBTQ Rights in Countries with a Muslim Magority Leonardo17 16 2228 January 14, 2023 at 7:33 am
Last Post: Leonardo17
  3 simple points to end the discussion with any muslim SaStrike 10 1308 September 20, 2022 at 12:14 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  The only woman to win the Fields Medal was a Muslim Alexmahone 25 4665 August 28, 2022 at 2:41 pm
Last Post: Eclectic
  There is no contradiction in the Qur'an! my answer as a muslim real muslim 37 3789 July 29, 2020 at 5:30 pm
Last Post: GUBU
  Fall of Muslim science Fake Messiah 1 771 January 13, 2019 at 8:59 am
Last Post: Brian37
  Refuting the book "Islamic government" (series of lectures of Khomeini) Mystic 17 2993 October 21, 2018 at 6:18 pm
Last Post: chimp3
  Muslim men to not shake hands with females Rika82 9 1904 September 13, 2018 at 2:15 pm
Last Post: vorlon13
  If a muslim grows old, do they have to dye their hair? Ruckus123 5 916 April 16, 2018 at 11:53 pm
Last Post: yragnitup
  So if Muhammad had long hair why so many muslim male having short hair? Ruckus123 3 1164 April 12, 2018 at 7:07 am
Last Post: chimp3



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)