Was Amenhotep III Sulaiman (A) | Mufti Abu Layth

Mufti Abu Layth discusses the theory of whether Amenhotep III was Sulaiman (A).

[@MrAlio84]

Regarding Amenhotep III being king Solomon, I like to add that scholars still don't know the meaning of this verse where Allah says *"Thus. And We caused to inherit it the Children of Israel."* Quran 26:59 Th context of this verse is talking about Egypt after the death of Pharoah. Scholars couldn't understand the meaning of the verse since the Torah never mentioned that Israel ruled Egypt after Pharoah. Moreover, Moses lived during the times of Pharoah Khufu. According to the Egyptologists, Khufu was the first king of Egypt who claimed divinity, he even changed his name to the god's name of Egypt. We also have archeological evidence that the vizier of Khufu who also constructed the building of Khufu pyramid is called Hemiunu (HMN without the later added vowels). I am sure the Jews and biblical scholars got the whole timeline wrong of all the prophets since they believe everything began 8000 years ago, unfortunately many early Muslim scholars relied heavily on the Israeliyat narrative when it comes to the stories of the prophets.

[@IrfanKhan-resistance]

History tells Ramses 2 was the pharoh during whose reign the great exodus took place. I don't know where u heard this version of history. Lastly, Khufu was around 2500 bc and Ramisis reign was around 12/1300 BC which is more near to moses life span which was also around 12/1300 BC.

[@MrAlio84]

@@IrfanKhan-resistance You said "Which is more near to Moses lifespan" According to who? Go read my post again, I already answered your point.

[@IrfanKhan-resistance]

@@MrAlio84 History, go n ask Wikipedia n other source webs in Google. Ur date doesn't sounds correct.

[@endoftimes2k12]

Wot a load of BS

[@theletterw3875]

​@@IrfanKhan-resistancehistory is not something that can speak for itself, what are you even talking about? Each historian interprets the available sources and creates a narrative perspective. History isn't an orthodoxy that can refute or support something on its own. These ideas are complex and require a complex understanding of the language being used.

[@celtislam]

Amazing! enjoyed this!

[@DarioHaruni]

Google the tiles in Amenhotep's Palace. They now fit the picture. The only question is why was Amenhotep mumified and not buried like the Jews and Muslims?

[@Tata-ps4gy]

Maybe there is nothing wrong with minification

[@Roadtodotca]

That name thing is the craziest 🤯

[@Tata-ps4gy]

I enjoyed this video a lot

[@robertocavalli8979]

Amazing

[@MSS_20]

Very interesting 😁

[@QuranicIslam]

Very interesting and lots of parallels. Just timeline would be very messy. Interested to see if it could all be put together in a new way. The main problem, it seems to me, is that you would have to fit in too much between Musa and Yusuf. If Musa is the son of Sulayman, and then Sulayman the son of David ... and all of course were Prophets of God with signs and taught monotheism, then why doesn't the "believer" in Surat Ghaafir mention neither Sulayman or David when he is arguing the case for Musa against Fir'awn? Instead he mentions only Yusuf and clearly implies or rather says that since Yusuf died no other Messenger was sent after him until Musa. The verse is; (وَلَقَدۡ جَاۤءَكُمۡ یُوسُفُ مِن قَبۡلُ بِٱلۡبَیِّنَـٰتِ فَمَا زِلۡتُمۡ فِی شَكࣲّ مِّمَّا جَاۤءَكُم بِهِۦۖ حَتَّىٰۤ إِذَا هَلَكَ قُلۡتُمۡ لَن یَبۡعَثَ ٱللَّهُ مِنۢ بَعۡدِهِۦ رَسُولࣰاۚ كَذَ ٰ⁠لِكَ یُضِلُّ ٱللَّهُ مَنۡ هُوَ مُسۡرِفࣱ مُّرۡتَابٌ) [Surah Ghafir 34] _"And Yusuf previously came to you with clear signs, but you remained in doubt regarding what he came to you with. Until when he died you said; God will not raise up after him another Messenger ..."_ So there is a lot to resolve in this theory I think. You'd need to have Yusuf, then squeeze in David, then get to Amenhotep III as Sulayman, then Akhenatun as Musa ... too much and too little time. Plus another major issue is that David clearly comes long after Musa and between Musa and David there is at least one Prophet who appoints a king (Talut) for the Israelites so they can fight because they had been driven from their homes and wealth (and where does that fit it?) ... It is during that story, explicitly mentioned as "after Musa" that David kills Jalut (Goliath) and so God gives him the kingdom (which Sulayman inherits) ... see Surat alBaqara v.246 - 251 which details Dawoud's "rise to power" all happening "after Musa". Also mentioned is the "sign" given for the Kingship of Talut being the ark or "tabut" which would come to the Israelites carried by angels and containing relics of what the "family of Musa and family of Harun" left behind. So clearly and emphatically in the Qur'an's timeline Dawoud comes _after_ Musa. Then of course after Dawoud comes Sulayman, who inherited from him. That's even in the verse quoted by Mufti that was said to Sulayman during the description of what he used to have built; _"work Oh family of Dawoud works of gratitude"_ So it just doesn't work if you accept both the Qur'anic timeline and the Egyptology timeline ... one must be dropped for this theory to hold. This is true whether you use Yusuf or Dawoud as markers for time. But the parallels are still clearly there between Amenhotep III and Sulayman. So what can be done? May I remind every one that we don't have to necessarily believe or accept ever thing from a people's self history that they recorded. The ancient Egyptians recorded their own history so they could have recorded it as they liked. That's very ungenerous, speculative and conspiratorial I know ... But right now that's the only way I see that it could work with these theories of Musa and Sulayman. Either that or it is the Qur'an which has a wrong timeline. Qur'anic timeline; Yusuf => Musa => Banu Israel with no King => unnamed Prophet => King Talut => King Dawoud => King Sulayman

[@QuranicIslam]

@@rhuiden4086 Yes the parallels seem to make it more credible. But here is the snag ... how does Sulayman, son of Dawoud, descendent of Musa who took the Israelites out of Eygpt in opposition to Fir'awn ... how does he end up becoming the Pharoah of Eygpt? ... Could the verses which talk about the Israelites "inheriting" what Aal Fir'awn left behind be that? ... ie that later somehow the Isralites literally inherited the kingdom of the Pharaohs? Look up all the verses talking of how the Israelites were caused inherit from Fir'awn's people.

[@QuranicIslam]

@@rhuiden4086 😆 ... Eh actually I think it's you who has taken my words literally. Yes that wasn't far from my mind that it could have been by battle and conquest, just as the Muslims "inherited" from the Jews as said in Surat alHashr. But the problem there is that in conquering they wouldn't start styling themselves as Pharaohs, would they? I am looking at it from the point of view of this theory. If this Pharoah was Sulayman and the legitimate Pharoah of Egypt and part of the 18th dynasty then it could only be viewed to have occurred via actual inheritance really, not conquest. It would create other problems for sure. But if you want to pursue that he was Sulayman, then that Eygpt was conquered by Yousha and those afterwards will not fit. But the Israelites conquering, then establishing their own Kingdom, then sending a daughter of Dawoud who marries the Pharoah of Eygpt, who births Sulayman through her (thus he would still be Sulayman bin Dawoud) and who becomes the true Pharoah by actual inheritance, and also then inherited Dawoud's Kingdom, thus encompassing all of that territory as part of Egypt ... well, that seems it could be a better line of inquiry.

[@khanG-gq9hc]

I think the problem is what ur bringing from biblical stories not from the Qur'an. The story you have is what mufti means when he says is only problematic if youve been brought up with bible influence of these stories.

[@QuranicIslam]

@@khanG-gq9hc I don't see how to be honest. Have you read my comment? I was talking about only the Qur'an. That the "timeline" the Qur'an gives is Yusuf, then Musa, then an unknown Prophet, then King Talut, then King David, then King Sulayman ... all of that is solely from the Qur'an. Yes Mufti is saying that the Qur'an doesn't give dates, or the stories chronologically in one place ... but that doesn't mean it doesn't given enough information to be sure of the order of certain events. It does. And the order the Qur'an gives goes against this theory as it is. Would you like to know the relevant verses (though I thought I put them in my comment)

[@muslix1147]

@@QuranicIslam When prophet Musa and Bani Israel scaped from Egypt (Exodus), the families of Bani israel: women, elders, disabled remained in Egypt. Bani Isreal literally inherited Egypt (Kunuzan wa maqamin kareem in Surah Shu’ara). However those Bani Israel soldgers with Prophet Musa who refused to invade the holly land were prohibited to enter the hollyland for forty years. It is this time after forty years and after Musa and Harun that that un-named prophet of Bani Israel appoints Talut and then Prophet Da’ud kills Jalut. This Battle was requested by the elders of Bani Israel, and like they said in (2:246) the aim was to librate their children and their homes.

[@SurgeonSuhailAnwar]

Thank you -Some good research. Can you do a programme on the stories shared between Quran and Bible ? Some think that Quran just copies these from Torah/ Bible ??

[@mrstranger1287]

History must be the most complex things.

[@LewisJoles75]

I think this makes perfect sense. The golden calf happens under the son of Solomon (Rahabome) generation. We have the golden calf in Exodus during Moses/Akenknoton rein. The timelines of the Torah and the kings timeline overlap. The nicknames are used in some cases.

[@DarioHaruni]

Also, interestingly the bird Hudhud (the hopoe) was a symbol of inheritance of the crown in Ancient Egypt.

[@MuftiAbuLayth]

jzk. very fascinating. do share more either here or via insta DM me. 🙌🏻🥰

[@DarioHaruni]

@@MuftiAbuLayth I'm noticing that there might be a symbolic parallelism between Hud-hud in Surah an-Nahl and the Goblet of the King (sawa'u-l-malik) in Surah Yusuf. Both of them, together with the word "al-khaba (the mystery) used in verse 27:25 are hapax legomena (words used only once in the entire book), and they're associated with a hidden source of power. Since in the same Surah we have the Basmalah, which is the a type of khaba/mystery revealed by Allah "in the Heavens and the Earth", a source of power for Solomon (a king's goblet) and a declaration of divine inheritance (like the hoopoe bird), i think all these motifs, whilst having a historical background at the same time, are mainly symbols for the revelation of the Qur'an itself.

[@interqward1]

Yep. You're on absolutely firm ground here.

[@interqward1]

@Siraj Haq I mean, there is every factual reason to think that what has been transferred into much later writings to depict some Hebrew personage 'Solomon' is in reality Amenhotep III. 'Theuth' is clearly 'David' the King.

[@interqward1]

@Siraj Haq 100% cannot disagree with you here.

[@interqward1]

@Siraj Haq Actually I should say a touch more about it. Personally, I find the Quran and Quranic literature much more mysterious and even 'mystical' than people realize. In the hands of ordinary minds, we find ourselves beset with 'add-ons' made by later humans, and additions to what is in the Quran itself, and also radical misunderstandings of what the language in there is actually saying to us. But this is true across ALL the religions, anyway. My position is that I only listen to and watch, other speakers, other views, mostly just out of curiosity. In the case of MAL, for me I find I do get some decent intellectual discussion and good sources expressed without too much 'spin.' In the end, what is this all about? What is life? What is it all about...? There is certainly 'something going on' but what it is exactly, is deeply hidden away from the minds of human beings. Most religions, well maybe even all of them, are not solutions, but only propositions. Man desires to get in touch with God, for real, in the immediate moment; feel the touch of God. Actually feel His hand, hear His words, experience His power, and gain from it by rising upwards to a place beyond his normal Earth-bound, mud-clutched estate. ...A man walks into a masjid, and approaches the Quran on its stand in the middle of the floor with reverence, really expecting to commune quite literally with God. That man is not let down. That man is also rare to find.

[@shairsko9360]

@@interqward1 I love your perspective and feel you are the closest to the Real Truth that the Quran speaks and very few have the privilege to experience as you have alluded to. The Quran is indeed full of mystery and similes which the majority do not actually appreciate or even understand. It may be that some of these mysteries will be revealed in times to come when science has advanced even further! However overall I find your perspective extremely intriguing and it follows the Quranic maxim of ‘ for those who reflect’ and ‘ men of learning and wisdom’ , not just take everything in the Quran as literal. Awesome dude as I tend to largely agree with your perspective on this issue! More power to you!

[@interqward1]

@@shairsko9360 Thanks but it's so complicated too. I despair that the vast bulk of any of the religious populations are ever going to get deep enough into what underlies these books and all of the related ideas. There's so much 'sectarianism' and frankly, nonsense from all sides.

[@bluerose04]

Akhenaten, I think reigned during Joseph (a.s.) there was during his father and his reign an advisor osiriseph... Which is close to the name Yusif. Shalmaneser of assyria might be Sulyman (a.s.) who has used glass.

[@furejul7619]

but is amonhotep rule in palestine?baotulmaqdis?

[@salmaabdullahielmi6182]

Amun meant the hidden one, refering to the hiddenness and inconcievability of neter, the High God, in the egyptian language.

[@Makasala1]

It is Truth u are speaking..Amenhotep III is Sulaiman

[@bubuurgulla-gurgullu3075]

I think these kind of researches help us from a historical perspective and for chronological purposes, but what if we know where he is from or who he is exactly ? Does that matter? It really is fascinating, but from a theological perspective it doesnt really change anything. Islam's message and the call for oneness of god stays the same after knowing where these historical figures came from, so its irrelevant from that perspective, isnt it?

[@asifbrettishmaelmakki9]

18:53 when u say axumi kingdom were queen Sheba is from, have seen it written in English that she came from kingdom of aksa,like the Qur'an words of masjidil aqsa or aqsal madinatay. Also in OT their is a guy called Sheba(a worthless man)who is Suleiman alysalam chief opposition. Maybe some coincidence their.

[@asifbrettishmaelmakki9]

Aqs u my Aqs al ma (👈 Qur'an pronunciation aqsalmadenatay) They do seem similar.

[@asifbrettishmaelmakki9]

@Siraj Haq .Acha Mr true haqun. Axsu and axsal . It how u pronounce it.mufti pronounce it as Axsumi. In Qur'an axsal is with QAF and Sword as in Surah 38 opening letter.it may say SAD but I pronounce as sword,Wal quranay Viv zikree. NB.if it's correct,it show Yemen and queen Sheba may be false narrative,oop and Muhammad's s.a.w night journey was not up north,but west🐍.u never know their could have been a masjid Al axsalaze at Ethiopia,early companions went their. Epheopian claim queen bilkis was from their country. I thought she was from Yemen.

[@asifbrettishmaelmakki9]

@Siraj Haq .yeh Yemen and etheopia could have been part of same kingdom,it's possible.i heard that all of Saudi Arabia was once all called Syria. Syria sound like Sirius word in Qur'an .

[@asifbrettishmaelmakki9]

@Siraj Haq .yeh.in Qur'an it pronounced sihreya (I think,I think bcoz not got hifz on that).

[@asifbrettishmaelmakki9]

@Shoaib Sheikh .Sam's speaks with good English vocabulary.he also shows beyond a doubt,that hadith(some of them)are in existence, only too uphold Qur'an translated verses that are crookedly translated.

[@contrezhunter-cd8ku]

If this was true why would they get buried with afterlife belief like that Audhubillah May.ALLAH SWT protect us

[@HasanDoesMMA]

Could Sargon of Akkad be Moses?

[@sparephone8228]

According to the Qur'aan Surah 3: 33-34, the linaege of the prophets is Adam, Noah, the house of Abraham and the house of Imran. The house of Imran comprises of Moses and Aaron, whose father was Imran [Amran in the Bible]. Thus Jesus is also decended from the house of Imran, since the Qur'aan describes his mother Mary as 'sister of Aaron' an ancient semetic way of linking a person to a glorious forebear. As for the kingdom of Solomon[pbuh], the Qur'aan describes the structures that were built, Surah 34: 12-13. I don't know if these have ever been discovered.

[@khanG-gq9hc]

I think mufti highlights amarna may also be linked amran/imran

[@JohnDelVentomusic]

Talk more about your Abraham went to the Indus Valley .. “Brahma” theory. Imagine Hinduism becoming an “Abrahamic religion” !!

[@yusufalef92]

They could have been the Persian kings

[@berox78]

Es Selamu Aleykum! Egyptian Pharao Amenhotep III (1390-1352) B.C.and Amenhotep IV " AKHENATEN" (1352-1336) B.C.,but Suleyman a.s. has Lived 971-931 B.C.have nice day mufti abu layth...

[@defenders1538]

Bro if you want the order of the prophets from the Quran I will be more than happy to give you the evidences And talking about the king Solomon, he's the only man who could build the ancient temples all over the world starting from the churches of lelibela Ethiopia 🇪🇹 ( the Axumit empire ) and Axum was actually the Aqsa that tje Quran was talking about and Misr in the Quran was actually the new called Sudan 🇸🇩 So to make long story short, the pyramids in Sudan were actually the ones built by the pharaoh and Haman , because they were built of clay and the clay is mentioned in the Quran. But the pyramids in today's Egypt, were built by the king Solomon in order to tell the story of Mirs ( Meroe ) were the strory if Moses and the pharaoh took place 😊 And in addition of Moses story you can also find the prophets lived in the region like Joseph and the Israelites, moses , King David and his reign and also what happened between the queen of sheba and the king Solomon. Why I believe that the prophet Solomon built the pyramids, it's because he had the wind and the birds and the Djins and عين القطر which is the geothermal energy including the magma and the metals in a liquid form. So if the Quran confirm that the pharaoh built the pyramids with clay , then it must be impossible for him to build the ones in Giza and all over Egypt ❤

[@icysaracen3054]

Mufti since you have a passion in ancient history can you do a series on ancient Arabia, Assyria, Samaria and Babylonia and talk about the ancient gods that were worshiped?

[@mzulfi3839]

Just a message to sita & gita,, I got paid for this comment🤑 🤑🤑, thanks mufti your dooooin it

[@Akanaton55]

Yes Akanaton is Moses

[@Akanaton55]

But solomon is the father of Akanaton...not sure i have to chek with my son tut....hhhh

[@glennisholcomb592]

one agian black

[@suleymanderman469]

What you Mufti and your audience fail to understand is that you solely rely on accounts of native Egyptian Kings discovered by Western archeaologists who record no figure like Moses as. The reason is because of your lack of reliance on Arab and Muslim historians on the subject. All of them reported that the Pharao of Moses as was from a line of Kings who invaded Egypt from Arabia centuries before, presumably the Hyksos. Most of them even reported that even the Pharao of Abraham was from these Kings. The 400-600 year old reign of the Hyksos is one of the dark and shrouded periods of Egypt since these people left no accounts or inscriptions of their own for the next generations. It's even a huge possibility that these were destroyed by the Egyptians who reconquered their Kingdom and destroyed any artifacts and inscriptions from their era since they were humilated so badly. As for the rest of your theory it's highly bewildering, not corresponding to any of the documented stories about the Banu Israil. Amenhotep was of royal native Egyptian line, not Isrealite, Asiatic or Arabian one that was foreign to the country. The Israelites were not Egyptians. The land of the Israelites has been ravaged and sacked by numerous people as documented by them and their neighbors. Archealogical researchers simply can't rely on the argument that they didn't find anything since this region is known for having been invaded and destroyed numerous times. You also confused names and locations and bear a lack of understanding of geography, especially in an ancient context. The Kingdom of Aksum didn't exist in the times of Solomon, even more less so in the times of Amenhotep III. The Ethiopia of the ancient world (Ethiopia is a word of Greek origin) designated the territory of modern day Sudan. It had no connection to the modern day Ethiopia in any way. The land you talk about is called in modern times Ethiopia, Abyssinia is an old outdated name. Ethiopia took the name Ethiopia when King Ezana of the Aksumite Kingdom conquered the land of proper Ethiopia and it became the largest part of his Empire. This happened in the 4th century AD. The confusion of the names Ethiopia, Abyssinia etc. starts here. The Kings and elite of Aksum proper were of Semitic South Arabian origin (Sabean and Himyari), not related to the people of proper Ethiopia at all who were Nilo-Saharans. Also, the Queen of Sheba was of royal Sabean line just as the Kings and elite of Aksum and it's predecessor state Damot which was a leftover kingdom of the Sabeans who conquered the territory and became independent when they had tribal conflicts in South Arabia and lost control over many of their dominions. The Kings of Aksum and Saba and Himyar etc. are all essentially the same people of the same royal line.

[@skepsislamica]

First

[@asiemmalik736]

The Quran doesn’t give a chronological order because the Quran has no order, stories and chapters all over the place. Stories based upon what’s widely established as mythology

[@ishmaelm1932]

Exactly. The Quran is very hard to follow, it's like the writer had ADHD. It's a very odd book tbh. It's better in arabic but still tough to follow

[@LaTortugaRBH]

@@ishmaelm1932 Well the verses revealed aren’t in chronological order. For example the 50 Surah wouldn’t be the 50th surah revealed the chapters were decided by the transmitters.

[@QuranicIslam]

But I think we can very safely know that fathers come before their children and descendents. And when people reference earlier figures who died then we are talking of a latter period. So for this there _is_ a time line in the Qur'an. It goes; Yusuf => Musa => Banu Israel with no King => unnamed Prophet => King Talut => King Dawoud => King Sulayman

[@droseyoungestmvp1]

@@ishmaelm1932 No the quran employs a "scatter" technique (this is a recent term used by poets & writers). Content do not always appear in linear, "logical" order, but in a non-linear psychological order calculated to produce new ways of thinking and perceiving. It's designed for contemplation. It's not a novel.

[@QuranicIslam]

@@droseyoungestmvp1 👍 I like that. Never heard that term before ... "scatter" technique, eh? Is that the actual technical term for it I wonder?

[@grandmasterset5612]

Moses was a title used by Egyptian queens and kings starting in the 18th dynasty with AHMOSE NEFERTARI THEN AHMOSE then tutmose etc known as the MUSAI KINGS with the greatest being AKHENATEN who along with his mother was from AKHMIM in upper Egypt aka kush aka NUBIA 🇸🇩 the aten worship was the FIRST spiritual system of kush aka Jehovah ADDONAI or ADON this then becomes ATEN which is the sun in Sirius

[@grandmasterset5612]

Facts Akhenaten is Moses amenhotep iii is Solomon which is really SALAMON remember vowels are interchangeable and Akhenaten who was son of amenhotep iii was Hebrew via queen tiye whose parents were Yuya and thuya .. so salam means peace and is equal to the African term “hotep” which also means peace also it was amenhotep iii who really started the “aten” worship evident by the temple he built for etiye aka queen Sheba