Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Big Bad Voodoo

Arabs claimed that GP is monument of science

118 posts in this topic

1.Great pyramid was monument of science

In a manuscript (preserved in the Bodleian Library, and translated by Dr. Sprenger) Abou Balkhi says, "The wise men previous to the flood, foreseeing an impending judgment from heaven, either by submersion or by fire, which would destroy every created thing, built upon the tops of the mountains in Upper Egypt many pyramids of stone, in order to have some refuge against the approaching calamity. Two of these buildings exceeded the rest in height, being four hundred cubits high, and as many broad, and as many long. They were built with large blocks of marble, and they were so well put together that the joints were scarcely perceptible. Upon the exterior of the building every charm and wonder of physic was inscribed."

Massoudi says that on the eastern or Great Pyramid as built by these ancients the heavenly spheres were inscribed, "likewise the positions of the stars and their circles, together with the history and chronicles of time past, of that which is to come, and of every future event."

Another Arabic fragment, claiming to be a translation from an ancient Coptic papyrus,gives a similar account of the origin of the pyramids, and states that "innumerable precious things" were treasured in these buildings, including "the mysteries of science, astronomy, geometry, physic, and much useful knowledge."

So, too, the famous traveller, Ibn Batuta, says, that "the pyramids were constructed by Hermes, the same person as Enoch and Edris, to preserve the arts and sciences and other intelligence during the flood."

2.Tomb theory-wrong

We know now that this pyramid was built during the reign of Cheops, in the so-called Fourth Dynasty of Egyptian Kings. But it is nearly as certain that Cheops never was entombed in it. The account given by Herodotus is sometimes quoted in proof that he was, but it is clearly a misunderstanding. That account says that Cheops was buried in some subterraneous place where "the Nile water introduced through an artificial duct surrounds an island." But there is not a single opening either in or under the Great Pyramid which is not far above the highest Nile level.

Diodorus says positively that Cheops was not buried here, but in some obscure and unknown place. For six hundred years after Al Mamoun broke open this pyramid the Arab writers who tell of the feat, say not a word of any human remains or indications of sepulture being found. Shehab Eddin Amed Ben Yahiya, on the contrary, says that "nothing was discovered as to the motive or time of its construction." Massoudi tells of certain findings, such as colored magic stones, columns of gold which nobody could move, images in green stone, and a c*** with flaming eyes, which stories none but a Moslem can believe; but says not a word of the finding of any man or any evidence of the use of the place as a tomb.

Source:

http://www.sacred-te...h/ams/ams07.htm

3. „Book of masters“

On one Croatian forum I found quote from so called „Book of masters“

„and so in all the teachings of the Egyptian mysteries, visible light was a shadow of the astral light and wisdom of ancient land- measure of truth.“

Since I translated this, I dont know would you recognoize it even if you aware of it. But I just want to see is such thing exist and does it say what does it say.

4. Questions

4.1. Since Im not good with Internet exploring, obviously, can someone confirm Massoudi, Abou Balkhi, Ibn Batuta and „Arabic fragment, claiming to be a translation from an ancient Coptic papyrus“? Are they for real? Did they wrote that? Can someone know works, perhaps chapthers of these quotes?

4.2. If so, isnt this proof that Great pyramid isnt tomb at all but monument for physics, history, astronomy and geometry? Im mean Arabs in the end move external part of GP. Why dont we believe them? They move it. They saw it. Why would they lie?

Big Bad Voodoo

Edited by Big Bad Voodoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, and why would a report dating 3000 years after the building of the Pyramids made not having a clue about ancient writing be any more reliable than those of Herodotus who claimed that one of the murals showed the number of cabbages the Pharaoh had to buy to feed the worker building the thingy?

Besides, there was no universal flood, especially not in Egypt since memorial times. Unless somebody remembers something the Dinos experienced.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, and why would a report dating 3000 years after the building of the Pyramids made not having a clue about ancient writing be any more reliable than those of Herodotus who claimed that one of the murals showed the number of cabbages the Pharaoh had to buy to feed the worker building the thingy?

Besides, there was no universal flood, especially not in Egypt since memorial times. Unless somebody remembers something the Dinos experienced.

Hey Questionmark,

I dont want that this thread move into was there flood or not. Maybe beside what Herodotus wrote there is more. Maybe Arabs didnt understand heiroglyphs but saw geometry drawings, stars, suns...Also maybe oral tradition helped. Perhaps some of Arabs did break hieroglyphs. Anyway I started this thread for questions 4.1. and 4.2.

To me it is amazing texts if they are true. Which sadly I still dont know. But if they are, then...many questions can be raised. Many.

Big Bad Voodoo

edit: whats the difference if it is 10 000 y.o. when Arabs saw it? I wish they didnt move it so that we can see it. Imagine, you know how is big GP. There cant be possible way that was only mural what Herodotus said.

Edited by Big Bad Voodoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, and why would a report dating 3000 years after the building of the Pyramids made not having a clue about ancient writing be any more reliable than those of Herodotus who claimed that one of the murals showed the number of cabbages the Pharaoh had to buy to feed the worker building the thingy?

Maybe 3000 years after they built it there was still writing about it. Maybe the process that

confused the whole thing wasn't as advanced at that time. Maybe there was all sorts of evidence

and a willingness to believe what previous people had actually said.

People did not eat cabbage and then drag stones up ramps. It is impossible.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People did not eat cabbage and then drag stones up ramps. It is impossible.

Clad

I often read your posts and I appriciate your effort much but please dont turn it into ramp thing. Although I would like to hear your insights on OP. Thanks in advance.

Big Bad Voodoo

Edited by Big Bad Voodoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is my understanding that no 'mummies' have ever been found in a pyramid. So what evidence is there that these monuments were tombs? That the pre-eygptian people built mud pyramids for burials? Is that sufficient?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Questionmark,

I dont want that this thread move into was there flood or not. Maybe beside what Herodotus wrote there is more. Maybe Arabs didnt understand heiroglyphs but saw geometry drawings, stars, suns...Also maybe oral tradition helped. Perhaps some of Arabs did break hieroglyphs. Anyway I started this thread for questions 4.1. and 4.2.

To me it is amazing texts if they are true. Which sadly I still dont know. But if they are, then...many questions can be raised. Many.

Big Bad Voodoo

edit: whats the difference if it is 10 000 y.o. when Arabs saw it? I wish they didnt move it so that we can see it.

Well, that is quite simple, the Arabs the OP talks about are those who occupied Egypt carrying their faith around with a sword, that would be after 639. Before 570 (and I don't want to sound racist but just pointing out facts) the Arabs did not even have a written language. In either case we have ~ 2500-3000 years after the thingies were built.

And we can easily see what Herodotus wrote by loading his book into the kindel and reading it.

Last, but not least, without the Rosetta stone nobody could break the glyphs, been tried and all kind of funny results came about (like defining the Giza complex as Joseph's granaries).

Would they have had the stone, and it should have survived their fanaticism (most likely it would have gone the way of the remnants of the Great Library) we would know about it, just as we know about everything about their science (forcibly as Europe screwed it up big time by neglecting it after the crash of the Roman Empire).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is my understanding that no 'mummies' have ever been found in a pyramid. So what evidence is there that these monuments were tombs? That the pre-eygptian people built mud pyramids for burials? Is that sufficient?

I wonder even if they were tombs, why dont believe to Arabs when they say what they say? Why GP couldnt have dual purpose?

But then again Greeks wrote that isnt tomb.

Big Bad Voodoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder even if they were tombs, why dont believe to Arabs when they say what they say? Why GP couldnt have dual purpose?

But then again Greeks wrote that isnt tomb.

Big Bad Voodoo

You mean like the Arlington cemetery?

Giza was a burial ground since the stone age, way before any pyramids and way after any pyramids (in effect until the 21th dynasty around 943 BC). So why would the AEs build anything but tombs on the cemetery?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Questionmark

al-Misri in 7 century and especially ibn Wahshiyya in 9 century partly translated hieroglpyhs.

Also Champollion said it wasnt hard at all.

Also can you rather give accounts of Arabs instead? Also I wonder what these guys al Misri and ibn Wahshiyya spoke about Egypt.

Big Bad Voodoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean like the Arlington cemetery?

Giza was a burial ground since the stone age, way before any pyramids and way after any pyramids (in effect until the 21th dynasty around 943 BC). So why would the AEs build anything but tombs on the cemetery?

Hm, Thats good question. I would probably give better answer if I understand their burial process, mummifing, tombs and life after death. Perhaps, from this amateur point, they wanted to send all known data with Khufu? Perhaps to preserve data on tombs because they were sacred?

Big Bad Voodoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Questionmark

al-Misri in 7 century and especially ibn Wahshiyya in 9 century partly translated hieroglpyhs.

Also Champollion said it wasnt hard at all.

Also can you rather give accounts of Arabs instead? Also I wonder what these guys al Misri and ibn Wahshiyya spoke about Egypt.

Big Bad Voodoo

I could tell you something about it if any of his writings regarding hieroglyphs survived, the problem is that they did not. There are more who claim to have gotten deep spiritual insight into the Egyptian hieroglyphs before the 19th century, sadly all those of whom we have written constancy knew as much about them as I do of the duties of the Pope, which amounts to about 0. And the Pope is no accident, because it was all kind of "spiritual" seer who claim this knowledge of which they have failed to provide evidence.

ibn Wahshiyya could decipher the demotic Egyptian writing, which did not exist yet at the time of the Pyramids. It was conceived around 650 BC (or about 2000 years after the Pyramids) and used by the Coptic until the Arab invasion. Not very helpful either to determine what the GP was.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm, Thats good question. I would probably give better answer if I understand their burial process, mummifing, tombs and life after death. Perhaps, from this amateur point, they wanted to send all known data with Khufu? Perhaps to preserve data on tombs because they were sacred?

Big Bad Voodoo

Here we are opening quite a new can of worms, but the first intentional mummified body we know of dates from around 3500BC and was partially recovered in Hierakonpolis. That would put mummifying attempts about 800 years previous to the GP. The first successful mummification ( we know of) dates from 3400 BC, or still 700 years before the GP. At that time the procedure was still quite primitive though.

The practice seems to go back to the stone age in Egypt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Questionmark,

Could you perhaps know about Massoudi, Abou Balkhi, Ibn Batuta and „Arabic fragment, claiming to be a translation from an ancient Coptic papyrus“?

Do you know in what book they spoke about it, or maybe chapters?

Big Bad Voodoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we are opening quite a new can of worms, but the first intentional mummified body we know of dates from around 3500BC and was partially recovered in Hierakonpolis. That would put mummifying attempts about 800 years previous to the GP. The first successful mummification ( we know of) dates from 3400 BC, or still 700 years before the GP. At that time the procedure was still quite primitive though.

The practice seems to go back to the stone age in Egypt.

But why idea that they inscribe their knowledge on GP is wierd?

Big Bad Voodoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Questionmark,

Could you perhaps know about Massoudi, Abou Balkhi, Ibn Batuta and „Arabic fragment, claiming to be a translation from an ancient Coptic papyrus“?

Do you know in what book they spoke about it, or maybe chapters?

Big Bad Voodoo

I would have to look it up. If I am not quoting from memory I always put the source with it. For tonight I am going to sleep, sorry

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But why idea that they inscribe their knowledge on GP is wierd?

Big Bad Voodoo

Well, to start with: There are (and were) very few "inscriptions" on the GP, most of them graffiti.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to look it up. If I am not quoting from memory I always put the source with it. For tonight I am going to sleep, sorry

:lol:

Then I can only wish you good night questionmark!

Well, to start with: There are (and were) very few "inscriptions" on the GP, most of them graffiti.

Perhaps. Arabs told us that surface was inscribed.(?)

Big Bad Voodoo

Edited by Big Bad Voodoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Massoudi wrote that Khufu (?) saw his pyramid in dream and then start to built it. Well that interesting when we consider my previous thread about AE.

Anyway this is only what I found:

After describing the construction of the three pyramids, Masoudi, says, "In the eastern (Great) Pyramid were inscribed the heavenly spheres, and figures representing the stars and planets in the forms in which they were worshipped. The king also deposited the instruments and the thuribula with which his forefathers had sacrificed to the stars, and also their writings; likewise, the position of the stars and their circles, together with the history and chronicles of time past, of that which is to come, and of every future event which would take place in Egypt."

After referring to the deposit of the bodies of the priests in the coloured (Third) Pyramid, Masoudi describes the guardians assigned by the king to each pyramid. "The guardian of the eastern pyramid was an idol of speckled granite, standing upright, with a weapon like a spear in his hand; a serpent was wreathed round his head, which seized upon and strangled whoever approached, by twisting round his neck, when it again returned to its former position upon the idol. . . . When everything was finished, he caused the Pyramids to be haunted with living spirits; and offered up sacrifices to prevent the intrusion of strangers, and of all persons excepting those who by their conduct were worthy of admission." The author then says, that, according to the Coptic account, the following passage was inscribed, in Arabic, upon the Pyramids: I, Surid the King, have built these Pyramids, and have finished them in sixty-one years. Let him, who comes after me, and imagines himself a king like me, attempt to destroy them in six hundred. To destroy is easier than to build. I have clothed them with silk: let him try to cover them with mats."

http://www.sacred-te...osgp/osgp10.htm

Edited by Big Bad Voodoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean like the Arlington cemetery?

Giza was a burial ground since the stone age, way before any pyramids and way after any pyramids (in effect until the 21th dynasty around 943 BC). So why would the AEs build anything but tombs on the cemetery?

Egyptologists say that there were only a few scattered graves before the pyramids

were begun and soon after numerous mastabas mostly on the east side. Egyptiuans

have buried their dead in the deserts since the stone age but Giza wasn't a true necrop-

olis until the pyramids were begun about 2750 BC unless there are structures underneath

the pyramids.

Until the science is done we won't know what's under the pyramids or why the Arabs believed

that these are monumentrs of (to) science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find Arab sources quite a bit in my research especially as it relates

to the Emerald Tablets of Hermes. These sources appear to be as

sound as any others. Even the Koran gets caught up in some of the

searches.

It seems very few thought the ancients were superstitious or built

massive tombs until rather modern times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until the science is done we won't know what's under the pyramids or why the Arabs believed

that these are monumentrs of (to) science.

Is that how you tell it?

Sorry Umers for my English. I feel like Borat sometimes among you. US of A.

Big Bad Voodoo

Edited by Big Bad Voodoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that how you tell it?

Sorry Umers for my English. I feel like Borat sometimes among you. US of A.

Big Bad Voodoo

I do tend to think of it as a monument 'to" science moreso than a monument "of" science.

It very much is both. It is a monument of science because it required extensive knowledge

gained through science to build. It required almost all the technology and science of the era

to do this.

But, it also appears to represent their science as well which helps explain why it was built. This

makes it a monument to science and one we don't understand.

That it's a monument of science is an obvious fact that most people seem oblivious to.

Your English isn't so bad. It just needs some work and polish.

Edited by cladking
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that how you tell it?

Sorry Umers for my English. I feel like Borat sometimes among you. US of A.

Big Bad Voodoo

Merely a note: Utilizing clad's spelling/punctuation/formatting as a model for your further understandings of the "modern" written English language would be akin to allowing credibility to his understandings of archaeology/Egyptology/geology/hydrology/linguistics/etc.

On these particular pages, you would be well advised to study/learn from such individuals as Kmt*, Jayle, Harte, etc.

Yes, the utilization of punctuation can, at times, be somewhat confusing.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merely a note: Utilizing clad's spelling/punctuation/formatting as a model for your further understandings of the "modern" written English language would be akin to allowing credibility to his understandings of archaeology/Egyptology/geology/hydrology/linguistics/etc.

On these particular pages, you would be well advised to study/learn from such individuals as Kmt*, Jayle, Harte, etc.

Yes, the utilization of punctuation can, at times, be somewhat confusing.

.

I tend to agree.

Just be careful what else you pick up from these guys. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.