Monday 23 October 2017

The Historical Accuracy of Haman(ہامان) As Mentioned In Quran,The Orientalists And Atheists Objections On it And Our Response

The Historical Accuracy of Haman(ہامان) As Mentioned In Quran,The Orientalists And Atheists Objections On it And Our Response

Arranged with Further Additions by Dr Ahead Hassan Alias Salman Fareed
»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»
The following enquiry is limited to information from five verses in the Qur’an, dealing with religious concepts and construction technology.
Pharaoh said: "O Chiefs! no god do I know for you but myself." [Qur'an 28:38]
Pharaoh said: "O Haman! Build me a lofty palace, that I may attain the ways and means - The ways and means of (reaching) the heavens, and that I may mount up to the god of Moses: But as far as I am concerned, I think (Moses) is a liar!" [Qur'an 40:36-37]
Pharaoh said: "O Haman! light me a (kiln to bake bricks) out of clay, and build me a lofty palace (Arabic: Sarhan, lofty tower or palace), that I may mount up to the god of Moses: but as far as I am concerned, I think (Moses) is a liar!" [Qur'an 28:38]
The Qur’anic verses concerning Pharaoh and Haman provide us with the following information:
The Pharaoh as god
Use of burnt bricks in ancient Egypt
The desire of the Pharaoh to ascend to the sky to speak to gods
Pharaoh had a leading supporter called Haman.
The Encyclopaedia Britannica informs us that the Pharaoh was indeed considered a god in ancient Egypt.It states
"The Egyptians believed their Pharaoh to be a god, identifying him with the sky god Horus and with the sun gods Re, Amon, and Aton. Even after death the Pharaoh remained divine, becoming transformed into Osiris, the father of Horus and god of the dead, and passing on his sacred powers and position to the new Pharaoh, his son."
So,the Pharaohs after death was called father of Horus and not Horus himself.
The Pharaoh's divine status was believed to endow him with magical powers: his uraeus (the snake on his crown) spat flames at his enemies, he was able to trample thousands of the enemy on the battlefield, and he was all-powerful, knowing everything and controlling nature and fertility. As a divine ruler, the Pharaoh was the preserver of the God-given order, called ma'at. His will was supreme, and he governed by royal decree.
Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary says:
"The Egyptians believed that pharaoh was a god and the key to the nation's relationship to the cosmic gods. He came from the gods with divine responsibility to rule the land for them. His word was law, and he owned everything. "
The Atheists and orientalists say that the Quranic claim of pharaohs depicting himself god was derived from Midrash Exodus Rabbah but this is thoroughly wrong.There are a number of problems with this claim.Firstly, Midrash Exodus Rabbah has been dated several centuries after the advent of Islam.So how can Quran copy a text when it was revealed centuries before that text.So the objection is a lie. The Pharaoh claiming divinity comes from first part or ExodR I part of the midrash. The second part (ExodR II) with parashiyot 15-52 is a homiletic midrash on Exodus 12-40, which belongs to the genre of the Tanhuma Yelammedenu midrash. Leopold Zunz, who does not divide the work, dated this whole midrash to the 11th or the 12th century CE.Herr, on the other hand, considers the ExodR II to be older than ExodR I, which in his opinion used the lost beginning of the homiletic midrash on Exodus as a source. For the dating of ExodR I, he conducts a linguistic analysis and judges this part to be no earlier than the 10th century CE. Similarly, Shinan opines that the origin of ExodR I is from the 10th century CE.The Qur’an could not have used a source that had not yet been compiled until hundreds of years later. Secondly, the midrash simply interprets the verse from the book of Ezekiel and claims that the verse implies Pharaoh claiming divinity. The Qur’an, on the other hand, explicitly states that the Pharaoh proclaimed himself to be the superlative god.
In the Qur’an, the Pharaoh in a boastful and mocking manner, asks his associate Haman to build a lofty tower:
Pharaoh said: "O Haman! light me a (kiln to bake bricks) out of clay, and build me a lofty palace (Arabic: Sarhan, lofty tower or palace), that I may mount up to the god of Moses: but as far as I am concerned, I think (Moses) is a liar!" [Qur'an 28:38]
It is probable that the command of Pharaoh was but a boast, and there is no evidence from the Qur’an itself that suggests the construction of the sarhan(صرح) was ever inititated or completed.
Long bars of baked clay were employed in the Predynastic grain-kilns at Abydos and Mahasna in ancient Egypt, and, while these cannot be called bricks, they show knowledge of the effect of baking on ordinary mud.
Egyptologist Sir Flinders Petrie in his book Religious Life In Ancient Egypt says:
"The desire to ascend to the gods in the sky was expressed by wanting the ladder to go up.... When the Osiris worship came to Egypt, the desire for the future was to be accepted as a subject in the kingdom of Osiris. When the Ra worship arrived, the wish was to join the company of the gods who formed the retinue of Ra in his great vessel in the sky."
The idea of the Pharaoh climbing a tower or staircase to reach the God of Moses, as mentioned in the Qur’an, is in consonance with the mythology of ancient Egypt. The Pharaoh, asks the gods (or men) to construct a staircase or a tower in order to climb and converse with the gods.
We are in no way suggesting it was only in ancient Egypt this belief was held, as Egyptologist I. E. S. Edwards correctly points out that Egyptians were not the only ones who believed that gods may be reached by going up a high building; this view was prevalent in Mesopotamia and Assyria as well.
It is clear now that the idea of the Pharaoh ascending to the sky to reach gods in ancient Egypt exists independently and has no connection with the biblical story of the “Tower of Babel”, which is believed to be a ziggurat.
The singular use and insistence on the “Tower of Babel” as a source of this particular Qur’anic statement appears to be a convenient device for those wishing to explain the Qur’an's supposed dependence on biblical material, and a lack of interest on their part in widening the historical investigation.
Having said this, it must be added that the issue of Pharaoh climbing up a high tower to mount up to the God of Moses depicted in Qur’an 28:38 has attracted the attention of Father Jacques Jomier, a Catholic scholar and missionary. Concerning this verse Jomier at least thinks to test the statement in an ancient Egyptological setting and asks:
"Here Pharaoh... asks Haman to build him a high tower so that he can ascend to the God of Moses (cf. v. 36). Could this be a vague recollection of the pyramids?"
Some of the Egyptian pyramids were indeed tall structures. If the Pharaoh did ask for a pyramid to be built then it was as if he was asking Haman to build his tomb! Alternatively, if it was indeed a pyramid the Pharaoh asked for, then the Pharaoh has proven himself to be a mortal to be buried in a tomb and not the God, as he had claimed to be. However, there are no recorded examples of pyramids made using burnt bricks.So our suggestion is that pyramids can not be the meaning of verses of Quran as they were not made using burnt bricks. However, there exist examples of several mud-brick pyramids from the Middle Kingdom Period. The pyramid tombs of Senwosret II (at Hawara), Senwosret III (at Dahshur), Amenemhet II (at Dahshur) and Amenemhet III (at Hawara) are the best known examples of mud-brick constructions. In some cases it was mud-brick core and a casing of fine white limestone.
After death, the king would pass from the earth to the heaven, to take his place amongst the gods and to join the retinue of the sun-god. However, he needed a way to reach the sky from the earth, a bridge slung between this world and the next, a “Place of Ascension”. Thus, the pyramid served as a place of ascension for the dead king. The Pyramid Texts inscribed on the sarcophagi and the subterranean walls served as “instructions” for the dead king’s ascension to heavens.so pyramids were for burial,not for fighting God Almighty.
Haman is given commands by the Pharaoh and carries them out dutifully.
Further, could Arabic Haman be a curtailed form of an ancient Egyptian name or title? Writing in the Encyclopaedia Of The Qur’an, A. H. Johns wondered if Arabic Haman could be an Arabized echo of the Egyptian Ha-Amen, the title of the Egyptian High Priest, second in rank to Pharaoh.
Broadly speaking, there are two lines of enquiry that open in front of us, i.e., Haman as
a title (or a curtailed form of the same) of an influential person or a personal name (or a curtailed form of an ancient Egyptian name) of an influential person.
Western scholarship writing on Haman in the Qur’an has understood Haman as a personal name. This derives from their understanding of the alleged connection between the Qur’anic and biblical Hamans, which is lacking in evidence as our enquiry has shown. We have shown that Qur’anic Haman in his ancient Egyptian context makes sense when various elements of the Qur’anic story are examined from a historical point of view. In turn, this opens up another line of enquiry, i.e., viewing Haman as a title of a person. Such an undertaking is also supported by the fact that in the Qur’an, the king who ruled during the time of Moses, is repeatedly called “Pharaoh” (Arabic, firʿawn). This comes from the ancient Egyptian word "per-aa", which in the Old Kingdom Period, meant “King's palace”, “the great house”, or denoted the large house of the king. However, in the New Kingdom Period, it was the title used to refer to the king of Egypt. Could the usage of ‘Haman’ in the Qur’an be similar to that of ‘Pharaoh’, i.e., an Arabized version of an ancient Egyptian title? Such a question can be approached by looking into various lexicons dealing with ancient Egyptian names, whether of gods or persons, and how these names came to be used in a variety of different contexts.
One may be tempted to say that the nearest equivalent of Qur’anic Haman (= HMN, in Arabic) in ancient Egyptian is either HMN or ḤMN in the consonantal form. However, this assumes that the consonants in Arabic and ancient Egyptian were pronounced in a similar way and that the ancient Egyptian name was not Arabized. Such a straight forward one-to-one correspondence of the consonants from ancient Egyptian to Arabic is weakened by the fact that the phonology of ancient Egyptian (a dead language!) is still an ongoing study and the evidence for Arabization of ancient Egyptian names exist in the Qur’an.
Updated, comprehensive and modern Lexikon Der Ägyptischen Götter Und Götterbezeichnungen, an encyclopaedia of ancient Egyptian deities and the theophoric names associated with them, sheds even more light. The entry under the ancient Egyptian deity "ḤMN" provides interesting information.This is perhaps the most comprehensive discussion of ḤMN among the lexicons surveyed here. From the mass of information provided, one of the entries stands out prominently, i.e., the use of ḤMN in the title for ḥm-ntr. So, who is ḥm-ntr? In ancient Egyptian ḥm-ntr literally means ‘servant of god’ (ḥm = ‘slave’, or ‘servant’; ntr = ‘god’). In other words, ḥm-ntr is a male priest (as opposed to ḥmt-ntr = ‘female priest’). This means that ḤMN in ancient Egypt was used in the title for a priest in a temple associated with the deity ḤMN itself. Since ḤMN was a minor deity in ancient Egypt (and quite local as well),any association of its priest with Haman of the Qur’an is highly unlikely. Nevertheless, this leaves us a tantalizing clue that the priest of a temple in ancient Egypt could have in his title the name of the deity of that temple.
A search in Ranke’s well-known book Die Ägyptischen Personennamen under ḤMN, unsurprisingly, reveals theophoric names associated with the ancient Egyptian deity ḤMN, out of which only one name ‘ḥmn-ḥ’ comes from the New Kingdom Period.
Originally housed in the K. K. Hof Museum, Vienna, the first person to publish the door jamb containing the ‘ḥmn-ḥ’ inscription was Reinisch in the year 1865. It was again published by Walter Wreszinski. This door jamb, now in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, is in fragmented condition. It also made it possible to acquire the vital piece of information we are now discussing. The name "Haman" was in fact mentioned in old Egyptian tablets. It was mentioned on a monument which now stands in the Hof Museum in Vienna, and in which the closeness of Haman to the Pharaoh was emphasized. (Walter Wreszinski, Ägyptische Inschriften aus dem K.K. Hof Museum in Wien, 1906, J. C. Hinrichs' sche Buchhandlung).Although neither the Bible nor the Qur'an name the Pharaoh, we do know that one of his counselors was called Haman whose hieroglyphic name has been engraved on a stela kept at the Hof-Museum ofVienna (Austria); the secular data is not precise enough to determine who the Pharaoh was in question.While hmn-h may be used in the meaning of Haman or not,but the evidence is suggestive that the character of this name may have been existed in ancient Egypt.The question mark in hmn-h? may not refer to the final “-h” alone, it may to the name as a whole.Still it may give the way to name Haman mentioned in Quran.Ranke gives a footnote to hmn-h which as , translated into English is: “whether abbreviated for hmn-htp(.w) ?” In other words, Ranke says that the hieroglyphic signs which are transliterated as hmn-h are an abbreviation for another name, and, although he is apparently not fully certain, most likely they stand for hmn-htp(.w),
One thing, however, is certain: Ranke may not suggest that the final “h” can be dropped. Still according to Ranke it is an abbreviation for a longer name, probably Hemen-hetep, meaning “(the god) Hemen is merciful”.This may point to Haman mentioned in Quran or not but one thing is clear and that is the name Haman was used in Egypt at that time either for a deity or a person and one of them may be the Haman mentioned in Quran.The second possibility is that Haman was himself considered a minor God and appreciated in way of being called as merciful.One more possibility is that a man Haman named after the deity Haman may have been existed in ancient Egypt as hieroglyphics are clearly describing the usage of this name in ancient Egypt and this possibility can not be ruled out.Bakenkhonsu (“Servant of Khonsu”) was a High Priest of Amun in ancient Egypt during the reign of Pharaoh Ramesses II.Bakenkhonsu is named for the god Khonsu, traveller, a Moon God of Ancient Egypt and son of Amun.Ahaneith was an Ancient Egyptian woman, who lived during the first dynasty. She was named after goddess Neith.(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahaneith).The ancient Egyptian pharaoh name Ahmose is a combination of the divine name 'Ah' (see Iah) and the combining form '-mose'.(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmose_I).So it clearly shows that in ancient Egypt,it was a common practice to name children after the name of deities and God's.So even if hieroglyphics show hmn-h as a deity not a man,the possibility of a man named Haman can not be ruled out.So historically,the existence of Quranic Haman can not be denied.
According to Dr.Morris Bucaille,hmn-h in ancient Egyptian inscriptions is Haman of Quran.Although Dr. Bucaille’s suggestion sounds seductive to some Christians, there are difficulties. At the request of an alliance of European evangelical Christian missionary organisations, Emeritus Professor Dr. Jürgen Osing of the Ägyptologisches Seminar, Freie Universität Berlin, a respected scholar of Egyptology, was solicited for his comments regarding Haman as depicted in the Qur’an and the identification of an ancient Egyptian inscription allegedly bearing his name. Subsequently in July 2009 Osing read an earlier version of our article (Titled: ‘Historical Errors Of The Qur'an: Pharaoh & Haman’, Last Updated: 4th June 2006) and made a number of observations, specifically focusing on our analysis of an inscription which is found on said door jamb kept in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna. Regarding this inscription which contained the name ‘ḥmn-ḥ’, we suggested the final ‘ḥ’ was not actually part of the name, stating the remaining letters could possibly be rendered as ‘Haman’. This is incorrect. The interpretation of the final ‘ḥ’ is questionable, but not its existence as part of the name. The final ‘ḥ’ is most probably an abbreviation forming a theophoric name. We would like to thank Osing for this correction. Additionally he pointed out that it seemed doubtful that this particular person being an overseer of the quarry workers, usually only of local importance, would have been entrusted with the building of such a mighty edifice, let alone be a close confidant of the Pharaoh – a consideration we had overlooked. For clarification we would like to emphasise that at no point had we ever stated the ‘Haman’ we thought was mentioned in this inscription was the Haman of the Qur’an. What we had said was that it was a possibility, however, this is no longer the case. For the sake of completeness and to dispel any doubts regarding the inscription, full details have been provided above.
During the time of Ramesses II, the period in which we are searching for the Haman of the Qur’an, the ancient Egyptian deity ’IMN or Amun, as it is called in the literature (Amun is the Coptic articulation of ancient Egyptian ’IMN), reigned supreme and had a large, dedicated temple in Karnak.Did the priests of the temple of Amun in ancient Egypt have as part of their official titles the name of the same deity? The answer to this question is affirmative. Lexikon Der Ägyptischen Götter Und Götterbezeichnungen under the ancient Egyptian deity "’IMN" lists the following examples.
It shows that ’IMN had various functions including being used in the title [‘In Titeln’] for various grades of priestly class – from the lowest wʿb priest [‘Ein wʿb-Priester’] to ḥm-ntr-tpy, i.e., the High Priest [‘Ein ḥm-ntr-tpy-Priester’]. Interestingly, it also cites an example of ’IMN being used in the title for an architect [‘Ein Architekt’], a sculptor [‘Ein Bildhauer’] and a singer [‘Ein Sängerin’] as well. These categories of people may have been associated with ancient Egyptian deity ’IMN through construction and singing hymns in the temple of Amun.It shows that ’IMN had various functions including being used in the title [‘In Titeln’] for various grades of priestly class – from the lowest wʿb priest [‘Ein wʿb-Priester’] to ḥm-ntr-tpy, i.e., the High Priest [‘Ein ḥm-ntr-tpy-Priester’]. Interestingly, it also cites an example of ’IMN being used in the title for an architect [‘Ein Architekt’], a sculptor [‘Ein Bildhauer’] and a singer [‘Ein Sängerin’] as well. These categories of people may have been associated with ancient Egyptian deity ’IMN through construction and singing hymns in the temple of Amun. For example, consider the entry ‘Amun vom Ramesseum’ or ‘Amun from the Ramesseum (= the mortuary temple of Ramesses II)’ which refers to the title of the High Priest [‘Ein ḥm-ntr-tpy-Priester’] and the Overseer of the House [‘Ein Hausvorsteher’], i.e., the Ramesseum. In summary, it is clear that ’IMN was used in the title not only for the priestly class but also for those involved in construction. The use of the name of the deity ’IMN in the title for a priest and an architect is quite interesting as it appears to add weight to our surmise that Haman mentioned in the Qur’an was involved in construction as well as priestly activities. He is put in charge of a very important construction project, indicating he possessed the seniority and skill necessary to see the task through to completion, although we are not told anything more about the construction of the tower or if it was even built. The question now is whether ’IMN is in some way related to Haman? For this we have to go into the phonology and lexicography of ’IMN.
It was noted earlier that the Pharaoh was the chief priest of every cult and had the foremost right to attend the deity. Since the Pharaoh can’t be present everywhere, in practice, the authority of managing the deity, offerings and other temple rituals was delegated to the High Priest, who was supported by lesser ranked priests.
It was mentioned earlier that from the Qur’anic evidence Haman appears to have been a person of importance, i.e., a senior official, to be mentioned with the Pharaoh. Furthermore, he was involved in construction as well as someone who had an understanding of the matters of ancient Egyptian religion. We also noted that ’IMN (or amana) was used in the title for a High Priest as well as an architect, which strengthens our case that Haman may be simply an Arabized version of the ancient Egyptian amana. It would be akin to the king who ruled during the time of Moses being called firʿawn which is the Arabized form of the ancient Egyptian word “per-aa”, the title used to refer to the king of Egypt from the New Kingdom Period onwards.
We are now left with some linguistic issues which may connect ancient Egyptian ’IMN (i.e., amana) with Qur’anic Haman (or hmn, if we consider only the consonants). It was noted earlier that ancient Egyptian ’IMN was written as amana in the contemporary cuneiform inscriptions and most likely pronounced with the initial ‘a’ as voiceless frictive, i.e., a breathy ‘a’ sound rather than a clear vocalised ‘a’. The phonology of Arabic language shows that there exists numerous frictives in Arabic – the voiceless frictives being ف, س, ش, ص, ث, خ, ح and ه. Out of these, only ح and ه are closest in terms of phonetics to ancient Egyptian ‘’I’ – a voiceless frictive. Arabic ‘ḥ’ (ح) represents a voiceless pharyngeal frictive and this is also found independently in ancient Egyptian as ‘ḥ’. Effectively, we are now left with ‘h’(ه), which in Arabic represents a voiceless glottal frictive. One may be tempted to consider Arabic ‘hamza’ (أ), the first letter of the Arabic alphabet, to write ancient Egyptian ’IMN or amana. However, ‘hamza’ is a glottal stop. On the other hand, the letter alif represents a long vowel. Clearly, neither ‘hamza’ nor alif satisfy the phonetic conditions to write ancient Egyptian ‘’I’ (i.e., a voiceless frictive) in Arabic. This may explain as to why the ancient Egyptian ’IMN or amana came to be written as Haman (هامان) in Arabic. Staying on topic, a similar parallel is Haman (i.e., המן) in the Hebrew Bible, which, due to linguistic considerations, is written as Aman (i.e., Αμαν) in the Greek Old Testament, i.e., the Septuagint.
The Christians say that High Priests of Amon wielded immense power and influence in Egypt from 1080 B.C. to 943 B.C. Most Muslim apologists date the Exodus story, and Haman, to the time of Ramesses II or Merneptah – who reigned from 1279-1213 B.C. and 1213-1203 B.C. respectively – over two centuries before the rise of these High Priests! Incidentally, none of these Priests had a name that is even remotely close to the name Haman.While it is true that high priests were more powerful and even separate rulers in late ages,it waa not necessary to be powerful and independent for the construction of lofty tower.In that case,following the command of more powerful master pharaohs.So following the comeans was not dependent on personal independence.
It is obvious, therefore, that there is no evidence whatsoever that the appearance of Haman in the Qur'an in a historical period different from that of the Bible involves any confusion with the Biblical version of history as claimed by a number of Orientalists and Christian Missionaries. There is clearly no basis for their allegations, that the Prophet Muhammad (P) mixed Biblical stories and Jewish myths of theTower of Babel, Esther and Moses (P) into a single confused account when composing the Qur'an.
The clash of Moses with Pharaoh, Haman and their supporters truly began only in the former’s second sojourn in Egypt. In other words, following the identification suggested in our previous study, at least 48 regnal years of Ramesses II must have passed before the confrontation between Moses and Pharaoh and his followers. Therefore, it is appropriate to search for Haman of the Qur’an post-Year 48 of the reign of Ramesses II.
The Christians say that How many "Hamans" should have existed at one time, each serving the many temples in Upper Egypt? Which of these numerous "Hamans" was the "Haman" of Prophet Muhammad's Qur'anic tale? The persons associated with Amun or Amana may be various people as we have shown above but one of them associated with Ramses ii was arabized to be called Haman.The Christians say that if we assume that Amon = Haman, then would not "Haman's" title be Haman-Ra in the New Kingdom? However, as in the case of "Haman", we have to ask again: Why has there not been any inscription found that contains the name or title "Haman-Ra"?We ask Christians that why and which basis this should be Hamon-ra.They should give its logic.
In our view, Haman is not the name of a person, but a generic title given to the High Priest of Amun. Just like Pharaoh is a title of the ruler in ancient Egypt in Arabic, Haman was the title of the High Priest of Amun. Since Amun was pronounced as amana in ancient Egypt.
Using the data of ’IMN from ancient Egypt and combining it with the information from the Qur’an, we now ask whether a priest from ancient Egypt could have been involved in construction as well? The chronological chart of High Priests of various gods of ancient Egypt during the reign of Ramesses II (r. 1279-1213 BCE) shows that only the High Priests Bakenkhons, Prehotep (Jr.), Khaemwaset, Neferronpet, Wennufer (son of Mery), Hori (son of Wennufer), Minmose and Anhurmose reigned post-Year 48 of Ramesses II. The question now is which of these High Priests were involved in construction and served the deity Amun? This information can be obtained from Professor Kitchen’s book series Ramesside Inscriptions and biographical dictionaries of ancient Egypt.
From Kitchen,s work ,it is clear that only the High Priests Bakenkhons (or Bakenkhonsu) and Prehotep, Jr. (also called Prehotep B or Rahotep in scholarly literature) had the title of “Chief of Works”. However, although Prehotep, Jr., held the title “Chief of Works”, there is no inscription from him mentioning what kind of building and construction work he did for the Pharaoh. This may be because Prehotep, Jr., apart from holding the High Priesthoods of both Re and Ptah at Heliopolis and Memphis, was also one of the viziers of Ramesses II. He must have had such a busy schedule that did not give him enough time to perform extensive duties involving construction, but it is entirely possible that he was involved in maintenance of the temples of Re and Ptah. That leaves us with Bakenkhons, the High Priest of Amun (i.e., ḥm-ntr tp n ’imn).
Bakenkhons was one of the great architects of ancient Egypt. He is well-known for supervising the construction of the temple of Amun at Karnak for Ramesses II. The main temple of Amun at Karnak “called by the Egyptians ipet-isut (‘most select of places’) – remains the largest religious structure ever created and consisted of a vast enclosure containing Amun’s own temple as well as several subsidiary temples of other gods”. Such a large scale construction of the temple of Amun is not surprising at all.
Not all ‘Chiefs of Works / Builders / Architects’ during the time of Ramesses II were High Priests. For example, Penre, Amenemone (alt. sp. Ameneminet), Paser, Maya, Minemhab, Amenmose and Nebnakht, who were not High Priests, also enjoyed one of these aforementioned titles. We have not considered them here because of the fact we are searching for someone who the Pharaoh would entrust the construction of a building with apparently great spiritual significance, a religiously motivated challenge to Moses and his God. As noted earlier, the Pharaoh’s claim (“O Haman! Build me a lofty palace, that I may attain the ways and means- The ways and means of (reaching) the heavens, and that I may mount up to the god of Moses” - Qur’an 40:36-37) was theological in nature, and so it would seem appropriate that he would assign his chief religious advisor with the task of constructing a religious building. In other words, Amun being the patron deity of Ramesses II, it would seem likely for the Pharaoh to ask Bakenkhons, who was the High Priest of Amun as well as “Chief of Works”, to construct the lofty structure.
The Noble and Count, High Priest of Amun Bakenkhons, justified. He says: ‘I am one truly reliable, useful to his lord, who reveres the fame of his god, who goes (always) upon his way, who performs beneficent deeds within his temple, I being principal Chief of Works in the Estate of Amun, as an efficient confidant of his lord.I performed benefactions in the domain of Amun, being overseer of works for my lord. I made a temple for him, (called) “Ramesses-Meryamun-who-hears-prayers” in the upper portal of the domain of Amun. And I erected obelisks of granite in it, whose tops approached the sky, a stone terrace before it, in front of Thebes, the bah-land and gardens planted with trees.
He holds a senior enough position to be mentioned along with Pharaoh repeatedly.
Haman perhaps died around the same time as the Pharaoh as a punishment from God for his unbelief and tyranny.
Bakenkhons was the High Priest of Amun, a very senior and influential position, and served the Pharaoh Ramesses II dutifully as he says in his inscription.
We also learn that Bakenkhons was the ‘Chiefs of Works’ (above cf. §2) and performed construction and erected obelisks of granite whose tops (or beauty) reached the sky, as gathered from the Munich inscription.
It simply denotes a tall (and beautiful) obelisk or pylon containing flagstaves that had a height close to 25 meters. Therefore, it would not be surprising if the Pharaoh had asked one of his ‘Chiefs of Works’, Bakenkhons in our case, with experience in constructing structures ‘whose tops (or beauty) approached the sky (or heaven)’, to build him a lofty palace, so that ‘he may attain the ways and means - The ways and means of (reaching) the heavens’, and that he may ‘mount up to the god of Moses’ [Qur’an 40:36-37].
By the time Bakenkhons died he had been a priest for ~70 years and served Ramesses II throughout his reign. In the last year of Ramesses II reign, Bakenkhons died at an age of about 90 years. This is approximately the same age when Ramesses II also died (~90-92 years). In other words, both Ramesses II and Bakenkhons were contemporaries who were born and died around the same time.
Several of the high priests from the time of Ramesses II also served as Vizier.So it is possible that Haman was the vizir of pharaoh.
The hieroglyphic name transliterated as “hmn” is usually pronounced “Hemen” in academic communication. Although this pronunciation may bear no relation with the original pronunciation of the Egyptian language.But the arabization of this word may have lead to the name Haman which may be the Arabic form of Hemen.
This person Haman was not the government official responsible for all the stone-quarries in the empire, but merely the overseer of the workers in one particular stone-quarry, the quarry of Amun. And overseers usually have to oversee, i.e. they have to be present in the quarry to oversee the work of the workers. So pharaoh may have ordered this person named Haman to start the construction of lofty towers under his I.E Haman supervision.
The question now arises as to whether the Haman mentioned in the hieroglyph from the K.K. Hof Museum is the Haman mentioned in the Qur'an.This question is easily settled as Quran mentions an ancient Egyptian official associated with cout of pharaoh and Egyptian archaeology has shown that the person of the same name was present in ancient Egypt.This is the discovery of Quran not mentioned or known by any one at the time of revelation of Quran and it proves that Quran is the Book of Allah The Almighty.
The Christians say that a person having merely a title like “overseer of the stone-masons of Amun” was certainly not the same person as the Haman of the Qur’an. But we have explained above that the Haman was the high priest,very close to pharaohs and ordered to construct lofty towers.But neither in Quran,it is mentioned that the construction of lofty tower was initiated or completed.
The quranic claim is that Haman (and Pharaoh and Korah) died a sudden violent death. However, there is no evidence that the person whom Bucaille and others want to identify with the Haman of the Qur’an died any kind of unusual death. The grave inscription4 consists of very common standard formulations that give no indication that anything unusual happened to the deceased.If the cause of
death is not mentioned,then Christians can not say that the Haman did not suffer a violent death.The lack of eviden is not absence of evidence.Hence this logic out by Christians can also not be used against the existence of Haman mentioned in Quran.
So we have evaluated the Egyptian history and concluded that Egyptian hieroglyphics and history matches very closely to the Quranic description of Haman and the Haman of Quran can not be labelled as non historical figure.
While it is possible that high priests of Amun were called Amana,the Quran uses arabized version of this name called Haman for a man involved in this story.It is not necessary to mention every one with this name but Quran mentions that specific man involved in this story and not the all others.
Summarizing the discussion, we have shown that the name of the ancient Egyptian deity ’IMN (or amana) was used in the title for a High Priest as well as an architect. The position of High Priest of Amun was of great importance and influence in ancient Egypt. Combining this data with that present in the Qur’an suggests that Haman may be simply an Arabized version of the ancient Egyptian amana. Barring certain uncertainties such as the mode and time of his death, the life and works of Bakenkhons, the High Priest of Amun, appears to accord well with the data about Haman in the Qur’an. Since events in the distant past can be expressed in a probabilistic manner due to underlying uncertainties, one can say, given the evidence presented above that Bakenkhons is a good candidate for Haman mentioned in the Qur’an.
When one compares the data of Egyptology to what is contained in numerous verses of the Qur'an, one has to admit that there is a remarkable degree of agreement between the two.

References:

http://www.islamportal.net/…/historical-errors-quran-pharao…
www. Islamic awareness.com

0 comments:

اگر ممکن ہے تو اپنا تبصرہ تحریر کریں

اہم اطلاع :- غیر متعلق,غیر اخلاقی اور ذاتیات پر مبنی تبصرہ سے پرہیز کیجئے, مصنف ایسا تبصرہ حذف کرنے کا حق رکھتا ہے نیز مصنف کا مبصر کی رائے سے متفق ہونا ضروری نہیں۔

اگر آپ کے کمپوٹر میں اردو کی بورڈ انسٹال نہیں ہے تو اردو میں تبصرہ کرنے کے لیے ذیل کے اردو ایڈیٹر میں تبصرہ لکھ کر اسے تبصروں کے خانے میں کاپی پیسٹ کرکے شائع کردیں۔