IT MAY BE NOTED THAT AN OBJECTION OF MISSIONARIES IS THAT QURAN

CONTRADICT ITSELF ABOUT THE NUMBER OF GODS OF EGYPTIANS .

AN ANSWER IS GIVEN BY ISLAMIC AWARENESS. WE HAVE JUST ADDED

SOME REMARKS AND COMMENTS IN SQUARE BRACKETS . WE ARE SOUL

RESPONSIBLE

FOR THESE ADDITION AND WE OPENLY CONFESS THAT ISLAMIC AWARENESS IS

NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ONE OF THEM. WE MAKE AN APOLOGY THAT

WE SHOULD NOT HAVE ADDED IN THEIR TEXT BUT WE OPINE THAT SUCH

ADDITIONS MAY CLEAR SOME CONCEPTS RELATED. SINCE WE THINK THAT

SOME EXPLANATION WAS NEEDED FOR A PERSON WHO DID NOT KNOW THESE

THINGS IN DETAIL.

ONCE AGAIN IT MAY BE CLEARIFIED ONCE FOR ALL THAT ISLAMIC AWARENESS

IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE ADDITIONS , THUS ANY FLAW IN THE EXPLANATION

CAN ONLY BE ASCRIBED TO US , AND NOT TO ISLAMIC- AWARENESS.

SINCE WE HAVE DONE IT WITH OUT THEIR PERMITION. IT IS HOPED

THAT ISLAMIC AWARENESS INSTEAD OF BEING ANNOYED JUST BECAUSE

COMMENTS,REMARKS AND EXPLANATIONS WERE ADDED WITH OUT THEIR PERMITION

WILL CONSIDER IT AS AN ATTEPT TO CLEARIFY SOME SENTENSES,

FROM US , AND IF ISLAMIC AWARENESS FINDS ANY FLAW OR FALLACY IN THIS

EXPLANATION , IT CAN CORRECT THEM. ALL COMMENTS FROM ISLAMIC AWARENESS

SHALL BE ACCEPTED WITH FULL HONOUR ,REPECT AND LOVE.

HOW EVER WE HAVE ADDED SOME MORE INFORMATIONS, BY EDITING AND READACTING

THE ORIGINAL WORK OF ISLAMIC AWARENESS.

[A]

Concerning the ancient Egyptian religion during the time of the Pharaohs, the Qur'an reports three interesting statements.

Firstly, when Prophet Moses calls Pharaoh to worship one true God, the call is rejected. Instead Pharaoh collects his men

and proclaims that he is their Lord, most high.

Has the story of Moses reached thee? Behold, thy Lord did call to him in the sacred valley of Tuwa, "Go thou to Pharaoh for

he has indeed transgressed all bounds: And say to him, ‘Wouldst thou that thou shouldst be purified (from sin)? - And that I guide thee to thy Lord, so thou shouldst fear Him?'"

Then did (Moses) show him the Great Sign. But (Pharaoh) rejected it and disobeyed (guidance); Further, he turned his back

, striving hard (against God). Then he collected (his men) and made a proclamation, Saying, "I am your Lord, Most High". [Qur'an 79:15-24]

Secondly, when Moses goes to Pharaoh with clear signs, they are rejected as being "fake". Pharaoh then addresses his chiefs

by saying that he knows of no god for them except him.

Pharaoh said: "O Chiefs! no god do I know for you but myself... [Qur'an 28:38]

The last statement comes in connection with the victory of Prophet Moses over the magicians of Egypt. Here the chiefs of

an abaPharaoh say to him that this victory of Moses over the magicians could result in

of Moses.

ndonment of you (Pharaohi.e., ) and your gods (Arabic: wa yadaraka wa ālihataka) in favour of the God

And the chiefs of Pharaoh's people said: "Do you leave Musa and his people to make mischief in the land and to forsake you

and your gods?" He said: "We will slay their sons and spare their women, and surely we are masters over them." [Qur'an 7:127]

Thus the Qur'an reports three important statements concerning the ancient Egyptian religion as practiced during the time of

Moses. Firstly, Pharaoh's proclamation that he is their Lord, Most High. Secondly, Pharaoh’s claim that he knew of no god for their chiefs except him. Thirdly, concerning other gods in Egypt who were Pharaoh's gods. In other words, a distinction is made between Pharaoh and his gods.

However, according to Christian missionaries, the statement reported in the Qur'an 28:38 is in "direct contradiction" to Qur'an 7:127.

In other words, the Pharaoh claims that he is the only god for his people, the Egyptians, in direct contradiction to 7:127 where the chiefs of his people express concern that Moses' victory could lead to the downfall of their traditional Egyptian gods (in the plural).

Commenting on the Qur'an 28:38, another Christian missionary says:

This is an enormous historical error. The Pharaohs believed themselves divine, however there is no evidence that any Pharaoh considered himself the one and only god. Amenhotep is considered to be a monotheist, however he did not hold himself to be the one and only god, he believed that title belonged to the god Aten [also called Aton]. The god Ra was considered the highest god in ancient Egypt, not the Pharaoh.

In order to support their claim of "direct contradiction", they quote Muhammad Asad, a well-known Qur'an translator, who considers that the Qur'an 28:38 should not be "taken literally" as the Egyptians also worshipped many gods.[1] Given the fact that Asad is better known for his translation of the Qur'an rather than his scholarship in the religion of ancient Egypt, the missionaries then go on to explain the alleged "discrepancy" without any recourse to reliable, verifiable historical sources. As one navigates the jumbled maze of verbiage one encounters apparently innocuous questions such as:

Did the Egyptians have many gods or only one god? Since this may not have been the same at all times, we would have to ask more specifically: What was the religion of the Egyptians at the time of the Exodus?

As is so often the case, the Christian missionaries fail to provide a single footnote or reference to substantiate their reconstruction of the ancient Egyptian religion. Instead the reader is treated to a tour de force of over a dozen links to internet websites of varying degrees of usefulness including a webpage belonging to the BBC, an Egyptian tourism website, a webpage belonging to the Edkins family that is "designed for children aged 7-11 years old" and a webpage authored by a public school teacher in Ohio. Ironically, the last link provided by them has an advertisement on the homepage offering a graduate degree in history.

Regrettably, what is sorely missing is an evaluation of the statements made in the Qur'an in light of the nature of religion in

ancient Egypt. Who was Pharaoh and was he considered divine, human or both? What was his relationship with other gods

of Egypt? Whom did the Egyptians consider as their principal god? In order to answer questions like these, we will examine

a selection of primary and secondary sources. However, at the outset, it must be said that since the setting of the story of Moses in both the Qur'an and in the Bible is in the New Kingdom Period, more specifically, according to majority of the biblical scholars,

during the time of Ramesses II or Merneptah, all our examples of the nature of ancient Egyptian religion would come from this period.

2. Pharaoh As Lord & God

As noted earlier, the Qur'an reports the belief of the chiefs who made a distinction between Pharaoh - who claimed to be

the god of Egypt - and his gods[ That is gods of FIR'AUN / PHAROAH, [MAY THE CURSE OF GOD BE UPON PHAROAH]]. In order to understand this distinction, let us dwell briefly into the nature of ancient

Egyptian religion. We will only provide a general description here and readers may refer to the cited works.

It is well-known that the Pharaohs have often been characterized as gods on earth[Each Fir'aun/Pharoah was supposed to be a son and an incarnation of

Ra', the Principle God and not a lower god]. While the kingship as an institution may

have continued fairly constantly throughout more than 3,000 years of history of ancient Egypt, just what the office signified,

how the kings understood their role, and how the general populace perceived the king do not constitute a uniform concept

that span the centuries without change. In other words, the ancient Egyptians' view of the king, implied by various historical

references, was not static. It underwent changes during the more than 3,000 years of Egyptian history.[2] From the early

times the epithet n r referred directly to the king as a god. Sometimes the term occurredṭ alone and at other times it

appeared with a modifying or descriptive word.[3]

Tradition says that in the beginning, kingship came to the earth in the person of the god-king, Rēʿ[RA'],, who brought his daughter

, Maat, the embodiment of Truth and Justice, with him.[4] Therefore, the beginning of the

earth was simultaneous with the

beginning of kingship[IN EGYPT/MISR] and social order [in Egypt]. The king, therefore, ruled by divine right, his office having

come into existence at the time of the [Begining Of the very] creation itself. The kings of Egypt legitimised their claim to the

throne in ways that were influenced by

religious beliefs [In Egypt]. The god-king, Horus, was the son of Osiris who had been king; and so every new king of Egypt became

Horus to his predecessor's Osiris. By acting as Horus had towards Osiris, in other words, by burying his predecessor, each

new king made legal claim to the throne. The divinity was only acquired through the rites of ascension to the throne of

. The device of theogamy was used for this purpose. Here, the principal god [MAY BE WRITTEN WITH A CAPITAL G INSTEAD OF A SMALL G

i.e'' God ''instead of ''god'' as it is costumary in English and some other Latin-lettered languages] of the time was said to have

assumed the form

of the reigning king in order to beget a child on his queen: that child later claimed to be the offspring of both his earthly

and heavenly father; and the earthly father was quite content to be cuckolded by the god.[Relation between two fathers

may be a mystry]]

Ancient Egyptians were aware of their monarch's inherent mortality. The unavoidable question now arises: How could

they

rationalize this apparent human/divine dichotomy[i.e Divine Nature and Human Nature] of their rulers? It could be that

it

was not a conflict for them. The king seemed to possess aspects of human [Nature /character] at some times and of the

divine [Nature/Character]

at others. The Egyptians knew that he originated in the world of humans, but he could function in both worlds. A ruler

envisioned as both human and divine was best suited to intercede between the human and divine worlds. Not

surprisingly,

due to this perceived fluidity of the human and divine components of the king's nature, it was not difficult for

Egyptians to

develop variations on and additions to their concept

of kingship. The king's human/divine dichotomy [of natures ] was, surprisingly, a unifying factor in Egyptian religious life.

In theory,

he was chief priest in every temple [probebly according to his human characterstics/nature]; the only person entitled to

officiate in the temple rituals, the only person entitled enter the holy of holies within the temple. Obviously, this was

evident: the king could not be in every temple at once.[Yet is is possible that his presence at different places at same time

would have been believed since there is no thing which prohabits Egyptian to believe in it with or with out an alleged proper explanation.So

if this belief is somehow implied it may not be rejected on the basis that an strict evidence is not conveyed to us by history]

However, the fiction was always maintained in the reliefs carved on the walls of temples, which always show the king

making offerings to the gods [Note gods , Gods. The difference between Gods and gods may be considered at least in

meanings if not as case sensitive words

in the first letter]. He was the embodiment of the connection between the world of men and the world of gods [g small

not capital]

, the lynchpin of Egyptian society. It was his task to make the world go on functioning; it was his task to make the sun rise

and

set, the Nile to flood and ebb, the grain to grow: all of which could only be achieved by the performance of the proper

rituals within the temples. With the advent of the New Kingdom Period, the religion in ancient Egypt also began to change

. Deification of the Pharaohs started to become a norm.

By the early New Kingdom, deification of the living king had become an established practice, and the living king could

himself be worshipped and supplicated for aid as a god.[5][Or an incarnation of God]

During the time of Ramesses II, the deification of Pharaoh reached its peak as evidenced in numerous cult statues as well as

supporting hieroglyphs and papyri.[6] Keeping this in mind, let us now look at the two statements made in the Qur'an, i.e.,

Pharaoh - the god of Egypt - and his gods.[Or more strictly Pharoah- the incarnation of God in Egypt and gods of the Incarnation of God, in the terms

of English and other languages which use Latin script]

PHARAOH AS GOD - THE VIEW OF THE KING'S SUBJECTS

God says in the Qur'an that Pharaoh addressed his chiefs by saying that he knows for them of no god but himself

[Qur'an 28:38][The Quranic Sentence may mean that Pharoah addresses his subordinate chiefs by mensioning that he knows

no God

for them but himself '' note the first letter in the word god is capatilized , so the word God is used instead of the word god

to convey another possible meaning,

suggesting that Pharoah falsely claimed to be God'' ]. This statement can be verified by simply checking the views of the

king's subjects, i.e., court officials and the common folk. What the subjects of the

Pharaoh could expect of the ruler in accordance with the Egyptian theory of the kingship is very well summed up in a quotation from the tomb autobiography of the famous vizier Rekhmere of Tuthmosis III from 18th Dynasty of the New Kingdom Period. The ʿinscription occupies the southern end-wall of the tomb of Rekhmere and comprises of ʿ45 lines of hieroglyphs painted in green upon a plaster surface.

Rekhmerē 's relation to the king (II. 16-19)ʿ

... What is the king of Upper Egypt? What is the king of Lower Egypt? He is a god by whose dealings one lives. [He is] the

father and mother [of all men]; alone by himself, without an equal ...[7][Clearly with out an equal implies that he was either believed to be the

Only God or an incarnation of the Only God but not the only god, as it may be stated in English with out adding more explanations.]

According to Rekhmere , the king of Egypt was a god by whose decree one lives. He is alone, has ʿno equal and takes care of

his subjects like a parent. This affirms that the officials in ancient Egypt considered Pharaoh to be their principal god [ A principle god may be translated as God instead of god]

], indirectly confirming the statement made by Pharaoh to his chiefs, as reported in the Qur'an, that he knew of no god for

them but himself. Furthermore, Rekhmere adds that the ruler like Egypt had divine ʿqualities such as omniscience and

wonderful creator [i.e God and not god, English do provide a case sensitive word to convey the same meaning though case

sensitive only in its first letter.].{ This may be compaired to Gita CHAPTER 9 VERSE 17. I am the father,mother, maintainer

and grandfather of all this universe. Gita translated by A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, The bhaktivedanta book trust}

The audience with Pharaoh (II. 8-10)

.... Lo, His Majesty knows what happens; there is indeed nothing of which he is ignorant. (9) He is Thoth in every regard.

There is no matter which he has failed to discern...... [he is acquainted] with it after the fashion of the Majesty of

(the goddess of writing). He changes the design into its execution like a god who ordains and performs.....[8]

Furthermore, the king was recognized as the successor [and an incarnatiom] of the sun-god Rēʿ[Ra'], and this view was so

prevalent that comparisons

between the sun and king unavoidably possessed theological overtones.[That is why he was not included in [lower] gods]

The king's accession was timed for sunrise. Hence the vizier Rekhmere explained the ʿcloseness of his association with the

king in the following words:

Rekhmerē 's as a loyal defender of the king (II. 13-14)ʿ

... I [saw] his person in his (real) form, Rē the lord of heavenʿ [the divine unincarnated nature of Godhead], the king

of the two lands when he rises, the solar disk when

he shows himself, at whose places are [Black] Land and Red Land, their chieftains inclining themselves to him, all Egyptians,

all men of family, all the common fold...... ..... lassoing him who attacks him or disputing with him...[9]

{In Gita 11:4 A ROUGH example may be seen

If you think that I am able to see Your cosmic form ,O master of all mystic powers, then kindly show me that universal form.

In 11:10-11 it is written : Arjuna saw that universal form unlimited mouhs and unlimited eyes. We have not provided these references

to annoy any one but to support the claim that such believes were roughly common through out the world.}

Rekhmere also adds that the whole of Egypt followed the ruler of Egypt, whether ʿchieftains or common folk. Now what

about the views of the common folk concerning the divine nature of the king? For this let us turn our attention to Papyrus

Anastasi II dated to the time of Merneptah, successor of Ramesses II.[10] Papyrus Anastasi II begins by "Praise of the Delta

Residence" of the Ramesside kings. The textual content of this section is similar to that of Papyrus Anastasi IV, (6,1-6,10).

What is interesting in this papyrus is the mention of exalted position of Ramesses II.

(1,1) Beginning of the Recital of the Victories of the Lord of Egypt. His Majesty (l.p.h) has built himself a castle whose name

is Great-of-Victories. (1,2) It lies between Djahy and To-meri, and is full of food and victuals. It is after the fashion of On of

Upper Egypt, and its duration is like (1,3) that of He-Ka-Ptah. The sun arises in its horizon and sets within it. Everyone has

foresaken his (1,4) (own) town and settled in its neighbourhood. Its western part is the House of Amun, its southern part

the House of Seth. Astarte is (1,5) in its Levant, and Edjo in its northern part. (1,6)

Ramesse-miamum (l.h) is in it as god,

Mont-in-the-Two-Lands as herald, Sun-of-Rulers as vizier, Joy-of-Egypt (2,1) Beloved-of-Atum as mayor. The country has

gone to its proper place.[11]

Here we see Ramesses II in four different aspects, viz., as god, herald, vizier and mayor. This is as if to show that he was

everything to the capital, especially god, and commanded everything.

Papyrus Anastasi III is dated to the time of Ramesses II.[12] In the section "Report on the Delta Residence", this payrus

describes the beautiful environs of the city of Pi-Ramesses. The description has come down to us in a letter from a scribe

called Pbēs to his master Amenemope, in which he describes how he reached the capital and how he found it in extremely

good condition. He then speaks about the antiquity of the town, how its ponds were filled with fish and its pools covered

with birds, and its meadows verdant with herbage. But the most important description of Ramesses II is towards the end:

... The youths of Great-of-Victories are in festal attire every day; sweet moringa-oil is upon their heads, (3,3) (they) having the hair braided anew. They stand beside their doors, their hands bowed down with foliage and greenery of Pi-Hathor (3,4) and flax of the P3-hr- waters on the day of the entry of Usimare-setpenre (l.p.h), Mont-in-the-Two-Lands, on the morning of the feast of Khoiakh, (3,5) every man being like his fellow in uttering his petitions.... Dwell, be happy and stride freely about without stirring thence, Usimare-setpenre (l.p.h), Mont-in-the-Two-Lands, Ramesse-miamum (3,9) (l.p.h), the God.[13]

Ramesses II is called the god by the scribe Pbēs. This again affirms the fact that even the common folk treated the king as a divinity just like the officials.

PHARAOH AS GOD - FROM PHARAOH'S OWN WORDS

In the earlier section we saw how the Pharaohs were viewed by his subjects. It was seen that the subjects treated the ruler

as a god who is alone, has no equal and takes care of his subjects like a parent. For them, he was one and the unique god.

Moreover, the Pharaoh was also considered to have divine qualities such as omniscience. By turning the issue around on its

head we can ask - how did the Pharaohs view themselves? The view of the Pharaohs about themselves is best seen in the

hieroglyphs. The rulers of Egypt were not themselves responsible for

construction of temples, obelisks, etc., where the

inscriptions were engraved; rather they had a team of architects who were responsible for executing the orders of the

Pharaoh. The hieroglyphs give good information about the Pharaoh, his family, his cult and his courtiers. Let us consider

three hieroglyphs from the time of Ramesses II (who had prenomen Usermaatre-setepenre and nomen Ramesses

meryamun).

Stela no. 410 of Hildesheim Museum shows two people, one is standing wearing the double crown with the uraeus, a

short skirt, a necklace and holds the so-called handkerchief or seal in one hand [Figure 1(a)]. He is called: "King of Upper

and Lower Egypt, the Lord of the Two Lands ‘Ramesses-meryamun, the God’".[14]

(a)

(b)

c]

Figure 1: Stela no. (a) 410, (b) 1079 of the Hildesheim Museum. (c) These have an important inscription saying

"Ramesses-meryamun, the god" [the god =God]. This inscription is marked inside a red box in both the stelas (a) and (b).[15]

On stela no. 1079 of Hildesheim Museum a man is depicted wearing a long garment tied at the waist, offering two

flowers with his right hand. In front of him is a table laden with various kinds of offerings, and two stands with a vase

between them [Figure 1(b)]. Opposite him are two statues, each wearing a short kilt, an artificial beard and the crown of

Upper Egypt, with uraeus in front. Above these two statues and before them are the words: "Lord of the two Lands

‘Usermaatre-setpenre’ Monthu-in-the-Two-Lands" and "Lord of the diadems ‘Ramesses-meryamun’, the God".[16]

Figure 2: A relief in the Great Temple of Abu Simbel showing Ramesses II venerating Ramesses II.[17]

Our last example of the divine kingship in ancient Egypt comes from the Great Temple at Abu Simbel [Figure 2]

. An interesting relief in the Great Temple of Abu Simbel shows the "Lord of Two Lands ‘Usermare-setpenre’" (= Ramesses II)

offering to "Ramesses-meryamun" (= Ramesses II). Obviously, Ramesses II is worshipping Ramesses II here. However,

we also note that the worshipper and the one who is worshipped have two different names and that these names are

pronomen and nomen of Ramesses II, respectively. A closer look at the iconography reveals that the worshipper and

he who is worshipped are not identical[i.e distinct]. He, to whom the offering is made, is adorned with a sun-disk and has a curved

horn around his ear, depicting his divinity. Therefore, Ramesses II is not simply worshipping himself, but his divine self.[18]

[The self possessing Divine nature is Divine Self, The Self possessing human nature is Human Self.But some how both selves were united.

But even then the non divine self could worship the divine self.]

[ IT MAY BE SEEN THAT CRISHNA IN HINDUISM IS BELIEVED TO HAVE MORE THEN ONE

FORM.

a; 4 arm form

b; 2 arm form

Vishnu [One of the Supreme Persons in Hindu Godhead] in a nut shell first incarnated in a 4 hand super human being then reincarnated

in 2 hand normal human being.[A popular version , but not the only one.]

This is a rough and approximate example and not an exact example. Yet this MAY provide a clue to understant things better. Different forms

of a Divine Person may be called gods if not in the Real Sense of the plural gods then in the virtual sense of the word gods.

Egyptians did differ from Indian concepts.

]As one can see from the examples just discussed, the Pharaoh exalted himself as Lord. The institution of Lordship in ancient

Egyptian belief cannot be underestimated. It was the way in which ordinary Egyptians understood the residence of their god

s on earth.[19]

PHARAOH AND HIS GODS

In the earlier sections we have seen what the views of Pharaoh and his subjects were concerning the kingship in ancient

Egypt during the New Kingdom Period. In this section, let us deal with the issue of multiplicity of Egyptian gods[gods not Gods] and their

relation to the ruler of Egypt.

In ancient Egypt, the basis of religion was not belief but cult, particularly the local cult which meant more to the inhabitants

of a particular place. Consequently, many deities flourished simultaneously and people in ancient Egypt were ever-ready to

adopt a new god or to change their views about the old. It has been estimated that over 2,000 gods and goddesses were

attested in more than 3,000 years of Egyptian civilization.[20] It is well-recognized that not all the gods were worshipped

simultaneously, and over the course of Egyptian history one can observe the rise and decline of individual deities.[Itmay be

noted that Pharoah was not a female God]]

Only a handful of deities from among the 2,000 or so were the recipient of a cult, with dedicated temples and priestly

offerings. The official state religion of Egypt concerned itself with promoting the well-being of the gods, which they

reciprocated by maintaining the established order of the world. The vehicle through which the gods received favour, and

in

turn dispensed it, was the king, who was, in theory, the chief priest in every temple, aided by a hierarchy of priests.[21]

Thus the king was unifying factor in Egyptian religious life.

The kings of ancient Egypt adopted a very business-like, quid pro quo approach, towards the gods, as seen in the texts

carved on the walls of their temples. The king[the incarnation of God as an incarnation] makes an offering to a god [Which is neither God nor incarnation of God]

and the god reciprocates in kind. For example,

if the king offers the god wine, the god in turn rewards the king with the gift of vineyards that produce the wine; if the

royal offering is incense, the god promises the king that he shall have dominion over the land from whence the incense

came.[22] But what if the god does not reciprocate the king's offering in kind?

If they [i.e., gods] do not obey him [i.e God or incarnation of God, God=Ra'=re' , as according to ancient Egyptian religion],

they will have neither food nor offerings[In other words if these gods to not obey God

or incarnation og God then....].

But the king [i.e incarnation of God] takes one precaution. It is not he himself, as an individual, who speaks, but the divine

power: "It is not I

who say this to you, the gods, it is the Magic who speaks"[It appears that magic was considered as some thing divine in a very

strong probability].

When the Pharaoh completes his climb, magic at his feet "The sky trembles", he asserts, "the earth shivers before me, for

I am a magician,

I possess magic". It is also he who installs the gods on their thrones, thus proving that the cosmos recognises his

omnipotence.[23]

In other words, if the gods did not reciprocate to the offerings of the king, they get demoted in status and standing.[This means nothing but the

gods in ancient religion of Egyptians were vulnerable to the divine magic of the incarnation of God, that is way they were forced

to reciprocate , and if any one of the believed god did not reciprocate ,then he/she had to face some sort of punishment from the

human incarnation of God. ]

Conversely, those gods reciprocate in kind to the king are exalted and worshipped. Thus, the gods of Egypt were not truly

independent gods; rather they were Pharaoh's gods[gods of incarnation of God]. Their rise or decline was dependent upon

the ruler of Egypt.

There are numerous examples from ancient Egypt showing the rise and decline of gods. Monthu was a warrior god of

Thebes who rose to prominence during the 11th Dynasty, but was supplanted by Amun during the 12th Dynasty.[24]

In the 18th Dynasty, Aten became the prominent deity during the time of 'heretic' Pharaoh Akhenaten.[25] Atenism fell

out of favour soon after Akhenaten's death. During the 19th Dynasty, in the time of Ramesses II, the three chief deities

of the empire were Amun, Rē , and Ptah. Since the deification of the living king reached ʿtits zenith during the time of

Ramesses II, this exalted status resulted in him labelling his monuments with dedications illustrating his divine status

such as "Ptah of Ramesses", "Amun of Ramesses", "Rē of Ramesses"ʿ [God which has the Incarnation] among others at

various temples.[26] As Professor

Kitchen puts it, such labels simply showed that these gods and others were nothing but "gods of Ramesses".

[It is almost clear that that if these were '' gods of incarnation of God'' not gods of God].

In Nubia, some time after the completion of Abu Simbel, the "Temple of Ramesses II in the Domain of Re" was cut in the

rock at Derr, further downstream on an important bend in the Nile. Later still, the Viceroy Setau had to construct two

other temples to match it - one similarly related to Amun (at Wady es-Sebua) and one to Ptah (Gerf Hussein).

In these three, therefore, Amun, Re, and Ptah, the gods of Empire were ostensibly worshipped - but (as at Abu Simbel)

the actual barque-image in the sanctuary was in fact that of the deified Ramesses II, as a form of Re, as "Amun

of Ramesses", and as "Ptah of Ramesses". Such temples, therefore, were almost additional 'memorial-temples'

of the king. Not only Amun, Re and Ptah, but also other gods (Seth, Herishef, etc.) were gods "of Ramesses", -

and even goddesses: Udjo, Hathor, Nephthys, and Anath from Canaan.[27]

It was noted earlier that the Qur'an reported the distinction the chiefs held between Pharaoh and his gods.

As for the latter, it is clear from our discussion that the Pharaoh indeed was different from his gods.

He was responsible for enthroning and dethroning the gods depending upon whether or not they reciprocated

to his offerings. Therefore, if a god was favoured, it was because of the Pharaoh who

favoured him. In other words,

the gods belonged to Pharaoh - they were his gods.

3. Conclusions

Reporting the statements of the Pharaoh and his Chiefs at the time of Moses, the missionaries suggest the Qur'an is in

error with the established religious beliefs of ancient Egypt. Basing their knowledge on over a dozen internet websites,

the missionaries claimed to have been successful in reconstructing the ancient Egyptian religion. It goes without saying

that one would generally not expect a detailed reconstruction of ancient Egyptian beliefs on a webpage "designed for

children aged 7-11 years old" or on a tourism website. By their very nature none of these websites are intended to

provide an in-depth discussion of the topic at hand.

A considered examination of a selection of primary sources from the New Kingdom period such as papyri, hieroglyphs and

associated iconography, reveal the Pharaoh was considered as God, one who was able to enthrone and dethrone other

gods depending on their perceived obedience to him. Such was Ramesses II excessive deification that he is even depicted

as worshipping his own divine self. To sum up:

To the Egyptian the king was the centre of all existence [with respect to its Divine Self]. Because he was an entity both human

and divine. He[incarnation of God] was the

link between this world and the other [ human beings and god beings, but not

Godbeing]. One Pyramid Text,

(No. 1037),

says of the king that 'there is no limb of mine

devoid of God', which means that the king united all divine powers.[28]

The Qur'an reports the statements the Pharaoh and his chiefs made which are in consonance with established ancient

Egyptian religious precepts. The Qur'an, however, condemns the claim of the Pharaoh being the god as false. The

Pharaoh was neither God, nor the Lord most high.

And Allah knows best!

Bookmark and Share

References & Notes

[1] M. Asad, The Message Of The Qur'an, 1984, Dar al-Andalus: Gibraltar, p. 595, footnote 36. Commenting on the verse 28:38, he says:

In view of the fact that the ancient Egyptians worshipped many gods, this observation is not to be taken literally; but since each of the Pharaohs was regarded as an incarnation of the divine principle as such, he claimed - and received - his people's adoration as their "Lord All-Highest" (cf. 79:24), combining within himself, as it were, all the qualities attributable to gods.

[2] A good discussion can be seen in H. Frankfort, Kingship And The Gods: A Study Of Ancient Near Eastern Religion As The Integration Of Society & Nature, 1948, University of Chicago Press: Chicago (USA); J. von Beckerath, "König" in W. Heck & E. Otto (Eds.), Lexikon Der Ägyptologie, 1978, Volume III, Otto Harrassowitz: Wiesbaden, col. 461 and also H. Brunner "König-Gott-Verhaltnis" in W. Heck & E. Otto (Eds.), Lexikon Der Ägyptologie, 1978, Volume III, op. cit., col. 461-464; For modern studies see J. Baines, "Kingship, Definition Of Culture, And Legitimation" in D. O'Connor & D. P. Silverman (Eds.), Ancient Egyptian Kingship, 1995, Probleme Der Ägyptologie - Volume

9, E. J. Brill: Leiden, pp. 3-47, especially pp. 22-34 for the nature of kingship in the New Kingdom Period; D. P. Silverman, "The Nature Of Egyptian Kingship" in D. O'Connor & D. P. Silverman (Eds.), Ancient Egyptian Kingship, 1995, op. cit., pp. 49-92

[3] For various usages of n r, please see A. Erman & H. Grapow, Wörterbuch Der ṭAegyptischen Sprache, 1928, Volume 2, J. C. Hinrichs'sche Buchhandlung: Leipzig, pp. 358-364; Also see E. Hornung (Trans. J. Baines), Conceptions Of God In Ancient Egypt: The One And The Many, 1982, Routledge & Kegan Paul: London, pp. 42-49.

[4] This discussion, with slight modification, in this paragraph and the next is from B. Watterson, The Gods Of Ancient Egypt, 1984, B. T. Batsford Ltd.: London (UK), p. 36.

[5] D. P. Silverman,"Divinities And Deities In Ancient Egypt" in B. E. Shafer (Ed.) Religion In Ancient Egypt: Gods Myths, And Personal Practice, 1991, Routledge: London, p. 64.

[6] For an exhaustive discussion please see L. Habachi, Features Of The Deification Of Ramesses II, 1969, Abhandlungen Des Deutschen Archaölogischen Instituts Kairo Ägyptische Reihe - Volume 5, Verlag J. J. Augustin: Glückstadt; idem., "Khatâ‘na-Qantîr: Importance", Annales Du Service Des Antiquités De L'Égypte, 1954, Volume 52, pp. 443-559, Plates I-XXXVII. Other important works are G. Roeder, "Ramses II Als Gott: Nach Den Hildesheimer Denksteinen Aus Horbet", Zeitschrift Für Ägyptische Sprache Und Altertumskunde, 1926, Volume 61, pp. 57-67, Plates IV and V; M. Hamza, "Excavations Of The Department Of Antiquities At Qantîr (Faqus District) (Season, May 21st - July 7th, 1928)", Annales Du Service Des Antiquités De L'Égypte, 1930, Volume 30, pp. 31-68, Plates I-IV.

[7] The inscription was published by K. Sethe, Urkunden Der 18. Dynastie: Historisch-Biographische Urkunden, 1909, Volume IV, J. C. Hinrichs'sche Buchhandlung: Leipzig, IV 1077, 17-18. For translation of the inscription see A. H. Gardiner, "The Autobiography Of Rekhmerē ", Zeitschrift Für Ägyptische Sprache Und Altertumskunde, 1925, Volume ʿ60, p. 69.

[8] K. Sethe, Urkunden Der 18. Dynastie: Historisch-Biographische Urkunden, 1909, Volume IV, op. cit., IV 1074, 8-10. For translation of the inscription see A. H. Gardiner, "The Autobiography Of Rekhmerē ", Zeitschrift Für Ägyptische Sprache Und ʿ

Altertumskunde, 1925, op. cit., p. 66.

[9] K. Sethe, Urkunden Der 18. Dynastie: Historisch-Biographische Urkunden, 1909, Volume IV, op. cit., IV 1075, 13-14. For translation of the inscription see A. H. Gardiner, "The Autobiography Of Rekhmerē ", Zeitschrift Für Ägyptische Sprache Und ʿAltertumskunde, 1925, op. cit., p. 68.

[10] A. H. Gardiner, "The Delta Residence Of The Ramessides", Journal Of Egyptian Archaeology, 1918, Volume 5, No. 3 (Part III), p. 187.

[11] The inscription was published in A. H. Gardiner, Late-Egyptian Miscellanies, 1937, Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca - VII, Édition de la Fondation Égyptologique Reine Élisabeth: Bruxelles, p. 12; Translation was done by R. A. Caminos, Late-Egyptian Miscellanies, 1954, Brown Egyptological Studies - I, Oxford University Press: London, p. 37; Also see A. H. Gardiner, "The Delta Residence Of The Ramessides - II", Journal Of Egyptian Archaeology, 1918, op. cit., pp. 187-188.

[12] A. H. Gardiner, "The Delta Residence Of The Ramessides", Journal Of Egyptian Archaeology, 1918, op. cit. (Part III), pp. 184-185.

[13] R. A. Caminos, Late-Egyptian Miscellanies, 1954, op. cit., p. 75; Also see A. H. Gardiner, "The Delta Residence Of The Ramessides", Journal Of Egyptian Archaeology, 1918, op. cit. (Part III), pp. 186.

[14] L. Habachi, Features Of The Deification Of Ramesses II, 1969, op. cit., p. 32; G. Roeder, "Ramses II Als Gott: Nach Den Hildesheimer Denksteinen Aus Horbet", Zeitschrift Für Ägyptische Sprache Und Altertumskunde, 1926, op. cit., pp. 62-63; L. Habachi, "Khatâ‘na-Qantîr: Importance", Annales Du Service Des Antiquités De L'Égypte, 1954, op. cit., pp. 537-538.

[15] For (a) see G. Roeder, "Ramses II Als Gott: Nach Den Hildesheimer Denksteinen Aus Horbet", Zeitschrift Für Ägyptische Sprache Und Altertumskunde, 1926, op. cit., Tafel V(3); L. Habachi, Features Of The Deification Of Ramesses II, 1969, op. cit., p. 31; For (b) see G. Roeder, "Ramses II Als Gott: Nach Den Hildesheimer Denksteinen Aus

Horbet", Zeitschrift Für Ägyptische Sprache Und Altertumskunde, 1926, op. cit., Tafel V(4); L. Habachi, Features Of The Deification Of Ramesses II, 1969, op. cit., p. 31; For (c) see L. Habachi, "Khatâ‘na-Qantîr: Importance", Annales Du Service Des Antiquités De L'Égypte, 1954, op. cit., p. 550.

[16] L. Habachi, Features Of The Deification Of Ramesses II, 1969, op. cit., p. 31; G. Roeder, "Ramses II Als Gott: Nach Den Hildesheimer Denksteinen Aus Horbet", Zeitschrift Für Ägyptische Sprache Und Altertumskunde, 1926, op. cit., pp. 62-63; L. Habachi, "Khatâ‘na-Qantîr: Importance", Annales Du Service Des Antiquités De L'Égypte, 1954, op. cit., pp. 539-540.

[17] L. Habachi, Features Of The Deification Of Ramesses II, 1969, op. cit., Plate II(a).

[18] H. Te Velde, "Commemoration In Ancient Egypt", in H. G. Kippenberg, L. P. van den Bosch et al., Visible Religion: Annual For Religious Iconography, 1982, Volume I - Commemorative Figures: Papers Presented To Dr. Th. P. Van Baaren On The Occasion Of His Seventieth Birthday, May 13, 1982, E. J. Brill: Leiden, p. 136.

[19] J. Assmann (Trans. D. Lorton), The Search For God In Ancient Egypt, 2001, Cornell University Press, pp. 18-19. Assmann says:

The divine realm of the Egyptians had a local dimension: that is to say, the Egyptians conceived of their deities as resident on earth. How was this residence interpreted? - first and foremost, as lordship. The kingdom of the Egyptian gods was emphatically "of this world."

[20] S. E. Thompson, "Pantheon" in K. A. Bard & S. B. Shubert, (Eds.), Encyclopedia Of The Archaeology Of Ancient Egypt, 1999, Routledge: London & New York, pp. 607-608.

[21] B. Watterson, The Gods Of Ancient Egypt, 1984, op. cit., p. 36.

[22] ibid., p. 40.

[23] C. Jacq (Trans. J. M. Davis), Egyptian Magic, 1985, Aris & Phillips Ltd. & Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers: Chicago, p. 11.

[24] S. E. Thompson, "Pantheon" in K. A. Bard & S. B. Shubert, (Eds.), Encyclopedia Of The Archaeology Of Ancient Egypt, 1999, op. cit., p. 609; E. K. Werner, "Monthu" in D. B. Redford (Ed.), The Ancient Gods Speak: A Guide To Egyptian Religion, 2002, Oxford University Press: Oxford, pp. 230-231. "Amun" in T. Wilkinson, The Thames & Hudson Dictionary Of Ancient Egypt With 316 Illustrations, 163 In Colour, 2005, Thames & Hudson Ltd.: London, p. 25.

[25] Perhaps the best introduction to the religion of Akhenaten is by E. Hornung (Trans. D. Lorton), Akhenaten And The Religion Of Light, 1999, Cornell University Press: Ithaca (New York). Also see D. P. Silverman,"Divinities And Deities In Ancient Egypt" in B. E. Shafer (Ed.) Religion In Ancient Egypt: Gods Myths, And Personal Practice, 1991, op. cit., pp. 81-87.

[26] For a full record of assumption of such names by Ramesses II along with scholarly references see A. Gaber, "Aspects Of The Deification Of Some Old Kingdom Kings" in A. K. Eyma & C. J. Bennett (Eds.), A Delta-Man In Yebu: Occasional Volume Of The Egyptologists' Electronic Forum No. 1, 2003, Universal Publishers: USA, pp. 29-31. For the inscriptions from time of Ramesses II mentioning such assumption of names see K. A. Kitchen, Ramesside Inscriptions: Translated & Annotated, Translations, 1996, Volume II - Ramesses II, Royal Inscriptions, Blackwell Publishers: Oxford (UK); idem., Ramesside Inscriptions: Translated & Annotated, Notes And Comments, 1999, Volume II - Ramesses II Royal Inscriptions, Blackwell Publishers: Oxford (UK); idem., Ramesside Inscriptions: Translated & Annotated, Translations, 2000, Volume III - Ramesses II, His Contemporaries, Blackwell Publishers: Oxford (UK).

[27] K. A. Kitchen, Pharaoh Triumphant: The Life And Times Of Ramesses II, King Of Egypt, 1982, Monumenta Hannah Sheen Dedicata - II, Aris & Phillips Ltd.: Warminster (England), p. 177.

[28] "King" in M. Lurker, The Gods And Symbols Of Ancient Egypt: An Illustrated Dictionary With 114 Illustrations, 1986, Thames and Hudson, p. 75.

[B]Some Commentators like Maulana 'ASHRAF 'ALI THANVI RH and Mulana SANAULLAH AMRITHSARI RH have opined that

the Pharoah\Fir'aun had made several Idols\Statues of himself to be worshipped, and here the word ''gods'' means

OBJECT OF WORSHIP , that his Idols.'' Pharoah and his idols''

We say that it is possible that these Idols may be included with other gods.

It is very clear that if Idols of Pharoah are also included amongs gods , there cannot be any problem and both commentaries

become in concordance and in accordance.

[C]There is no contradiction in the Holy Arabic Scripture nounly ALQURAN.

Since If it is a contradiction it is a contradiction between Pharoah and his chiefs.

Al Quran only Reporteth and Narrateth their CONTRADICTING STATEMENTS.

T o narrate and to report contradicting statement is one thing and to narrate or to report

a two or more contradicting statements of two or more different persons is an other thing.

So one statement of ALQURAN CONTRADICTETH NOT with another Statement of AlQuran

Quran reporteth two contradicting Statements of two or more persons.

So if there is a contradiction , it meaneth that The Chiefs of Pharoah contradicted

Pharoah [apologitically and humbly]. An inquisation may be needed for the interpellation

that why did Pharoah claimed to be Only GOD when he believed in a number of gods GODS beside

himself.

Two answers have been provided in section A and section B. Now a POSSIBLE AND CONTINGENT

answer IS PROVIDED ,which may not be so strong yet it is sufficiently powerful to disprove

the alleged contradiction.

'' Pharoah\Fir'aun after listening Message Of Only True God[IHVH\'ALL-H] as conveyed by Great Prophet Moses\

Musa [MAY PEACE OF GOD BE UPON PROPHET MOSES] came was exited and in responce

claimed to be the ONLY god. Now the Subordinate Chiefs Of Pharoah did fear Pharoah and did not have

the corruage to contradict him directly, by saying ''O Pharoah thou hast commited apostacy sinc thou art

a god among other gods, not the only god as according to the creed and religion of Egypt'' very

cleverly contradicted him so that he may not be annoyed.If so then it appeareth that Pharoah

did accept their correction and did not insist to be the only god.

This possibility and contingency does remove the alleged contradiction and does provide

a solution.

[D]

IT is possible and contingent that

when pAharoah spoke ,

he included all the otrher Egyption gods in himself or in his divine self

as according to the Ancient religion.But when his chiefs spoke to him

the excluded these Egyptian gods.

Since the God whose suppossed incarnation incarnation [Pharoah]

was believed to be the source of all lower

gods, the Godhead to which the lower gods [gods]

owe their respective godhoods.

Pharoah was speaking as if the divine self [ i.e the self with divine nature]

was speaking through the human self [ the self with human nature].

Chiefs were only speaking to the human self and not to the divine self

[ neither directly nor indirectly [through human self]]

In Gita 11:21 we find:.

All denigids surrender unto You, entering into You.Very much

afraid,with folded hands, they are praying Vedic Hymns.

[Ref is same]

I