ANALYZING THE "BLACK" IDENTITY (A SOCIOPOLITICAL CONSTRUCT). WE ARE NOT BLACK PEOPLE.

ANALYZING THE "BLACK" IDENTITY (A SOCIOPOLITICAL CONSTRUCT). WE ARE NOT BLACK PEOPLE.

A SUMMARY EXCERPT FROM AN UPCOMING BOOK.

By Sheik Way-El, Grand Sheik & Divine Minister of the Moorish Science Temple of America

I rise giving all praise to Allah and the highest honors to Holy  and Divine Prophet Noble Drew Ali. I extend those honors to the Harbinger and forerunner Marcus Mosiah Garvey. I extend honors to all True and Divine Prophets. I extend honors to all of the Messengers sent to us in the West; And I extend honors to you all for when, Man honors Man, he honors his Father God-Allah.

The matter of the various names given to our ancestors of Moorish descent, a people representing skin tones of every race of the globe, was an act of European psychology. They gave our ancestors the slave labels of Negro, Black, Colored and Ethiopians (African American replaces this term today), these brands were then defined as something inferior to theirs. They took on the title "White" because it represents purity and God and it was opposite of black, but when you observe the skin tone of a European, you will see that it is not white at all, it is pale, genetically faded down over thousands of years from the brown skin tone that we, the Moorish progenitors of humanity have now. After the last of the slaves were freed in 1865 (slavery was abolished in many northern states well before 1865), the acceptance of these slave labels (Negro, Black, Colored) solidified the mental grip upon our people that persists until this day as there are no black or white people and yet, this notion, enforced by the European who created a caste system from the times of the first "color coded" classifications, creating a condition called doublethink even among some of our best and brightest minds, believe it or not, is at the forefront of our problems today because you cannot think past what you think you are. The "Negro/Black" people as they were called in this nation, have no nation to which they might look with pride. Their history starts with the close of the Civil war or more properly with his being forced to serve some one else. Because of his not knowing his true history and the religion of his forefathers, he is separated from the illustrious history of his forefathers who were the founders of the first civilization of the Old World. Proof of this can be seen in February which is called "Black History Month." Every year since the inception of what I have to call a "mental slavery enforcing program", stories are told about slave times and the tumultuous times there after; but never is the history about the people who built the great and wonderful edifices of the old world documented or discussed via the public outlet. Today, you have many groups who fight for being black more than they will fight for anything else. These people are what the Koran of Mohammed call the deaf, dumb, and blind for they have ears to hear the truth but they reject it; they have a mind to discern the information that proves that we are not a black people, and that this title was given us by the pale skin nations of Europe but they refuse to analyze it or reason it out; and they have eyes to simply look at their own skin and see that it is not black and that they are not a black people and yet, they refuse to look.​

Now, I want to bring you to Federal Directive 15 which was adopted on May 12, 1977. 

This Directive provides standard classifications for record keeping, collection, and presentation of data on race and ethnicity in Federal program administrative reporting and statistical activities. These classifications should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature, nor should they be viewed as determinants of eligibility for participation in any Federal program. They have been developed in response to needs expressed by both the executive branch and the Congress to provide for the collection and use of compatible, nonduplicated, exchangeable racial and ethnic data by Federal agencies.

1. DefinitionsThe basic racial and ethnic categories for Federal statistics and program administrative reporting are defined as follows:

1. American Indian or Alaskan Native. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North America, and who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition.
2. Asian or Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands. This area includes, for example, China, India, Japan, Korea, the Philippine Islands, and Samoa.
3. Black. A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.
4. Hispanic. A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race.
5. White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, North Africa, or the Middle East.[1]

In the above definitions, there are many different things to point out that I will not fully delve into for this summary. But here is something to note; notice that it says "These classifications should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature". Well if they are not using science or anthropology to determine racial classifications, then what exactly are they using? Think my people, think... Look at the definition of  White" for instance which says "A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, North Africa, or the Middle East." History and anthropology will show us that the first peoples of Europe were Moors or what you would falsely call black people. That the first people of North Africa were Moors or what you would falsely call black people. That the first people of the Middle East (Arabia generally) were in fact Moors, or what you would call black people.

These are the definitions used for determining classifications of human beings into separate groups. But notice, they only use Black for those of Moorish descent, and White for those of European descent. Why is this? Why not use Red for the American Indians, Or Yellow for the Asians? Why is that black and white are the only two colors (if you will) used by these classifiers of human beings? You ever overhear, have been a part of, or said during a conversation: 

"Man, it was a lot of different people there. You had Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, Chinese, Koreans, White people and Black people..."

Did you notice it? When naming peoples, everyone always says the nation of the people except when it comes to those people of Moorish descent and those people of European descent. People of America who call themselves "Blacks" will see people from Haiti or Jamaica and call them Haitian or Jamaican before they call them black. They will see themselves as Americans under this false label of "black" however. For these American peoples, Black and White are always used. Why? This is why we call this labeling system an act of "European psychology". Now today, you have the Mexicans and Puerto Ricans actually being called "Brown" people when their skin tones are not brown (moreno) at all. If you cannot see this, it is because you refuse to take the chunk of wood out of your eyes. 

The color coded system we use today is based on the likes of racist Europeans like François Bernier (1620 – 1688), Carl Linnaeus (1707 – 1778), and Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (1752 – 1840). In their creation of the color coded race hierarchy, White was placed as the Superior and Black was placed as the inferior. Instead of correcting this act of European psychology, certain groups decided to put Black as the Superior, and White as the inferior. All this did was add to the confusion and created a false sense of pride based on a paradigm that was creates solely for the denationalizing of a certain group of humans, e.g. us, the Moors! Let us look at these colors we have accepted and assigned to men and how truly asinine they are to our eye sights.

The people called "black" are actually DARK BROWN and the people that are SUPPOSED TO BE "brown" (Mexicans, etc.) look like everyone else in complexion besides the Moors.

If you see this and still call people by these colors, then you are in fact blinded and because you cannot see, the European remains on top and you give him the superior position by calling his rule "White Supremacy" as opposed to what it truly is "European psychology". WAKE UP AND OPEN YOUR EYES!

You are not black people

The craziest and most head scratching concept of all is this color coded system currently used to identify and classify human beings as we detailed above; but especially in the United States. What really gets me is that most of our thinking men and woman who are of Moorish descent who are in positions of power, in higher education, scholars, professors etc., cannot simply see that we are not a black people by using their eye sight alone. The Cable News Network (CNN) airs a documentary every so often called “Black in America”. What you all do not realize is that, such programs while successfully depicting the plight of our people here in the West (good and/or bad), it also reinforces the false belief that the people themselves are actually black and does far more damage than good. No doubt, this is by design.

Some prefer not to use “Black” or “Negro” but “Colored”. Now what type of sense does that make? Who colored you? To be colored means that you were either painted, stained, varnished, or dyed. It is without doubt that this type of name-classification can be found in Europe where the Moors were called “painted men” by the pale skinned Europeans because of their sable swarthy brown olive-toned skins.[2] What this psychologically implies is that all men were once of pale skin and that somewhere, during some time, these men were "colored in" by some event. What event? Who knows, possibly the hot sun when people of Moorish ancestry first inhabited Africa from the east hundreds of thousands of years ago. Yeah that’s what happened. Right? We started off pale then got darkened or "colored in". Right? Of course not.

This false term “black” dates back farther than we think. This author is going to piece together something that has never been penned in literary or historical history. Prophet Noble Drew Ali teaches us about a time when a man named Joshua ran our people from among the ancient Holy Lands. Many people falsely believe that because a name or a people appear in the Bible, that it automatically originates with the Bible and that most of these characters and peoples are fictional. This shows the shallowness of our research and our blind deference to our Afrocentric scholars who for the most part, were the proponents for most of these theories.

This author strongly believes that the labeling of our people as black comes from this "Yahwist" (also called Judaic) school of thought. Consider this; at one point in time, the Hellenes (Greeks) and the people called Jews today, met up with each other and intermingled. One people, the Joshuaites (so-called Jews), had already conquered our people in the eastern lands by sheer force. This historical event is captured in the book of Joshua of the bible. Historical records found proves that this was not like some of the biblical events which were either made up or grossly exaggerated to fit the biblical narrative, but that instead, it was an actual event. A Greek historian named Procopius of Caesarea wrote in the sixth century AD which was subsequently cited by modern scholars that:

They [the Canaanites] also built a fortress in Numidia, where now is the city called Tigisis [probably in Algeria]. In that place are two columns made of white stone near by the great spring, having Phoenician letters cut in them which say in the Phoenician tongue:“We are they who fled from before the face of Joshua, the robber, the son of Nun”[3]

“these Canaanites of Africa were driven out of the land of Canaan by Joshua. About 332 B.C. Alexander conquered Palestine. As stated above, the Africans came to Alexander claiming that the land of Canaan belonged to them. The point that I want to elucidate is that these Canaanites considered themselves Africans. We can correctly say that the Hebrew-Canaanite language is one of the African languages.”[4][emphasis mines]

These people of Joshua with ruthless barbarity, came and conquered the old countries of the Moors of the ancient Holy Lands of the Levant and drove them out. Enter the Hellenes. These were another group of pale skinned people who by sheer and utter dominance, wiped out whole civilizations and if they did not wipe them out, they replaced the imagery of the people with imagery more favorable to the Hellenes. At some point, these two forces (Hellenes and Yahwists (Jews)) meet and at some point, these two forces co-mingle with each other. This relationship is important in understanding the reason why  this researcher believes we have this label "black" for the dark brown skinned nations of the earth.

Let us examine something critical in this regard. According to the online etymological dictionary, we find the trace of the word Moor as such:

Moor (n.)
"North African, Berber," late 14c., from Old French More, from Medieval Latin Morus, from Latin Maurus "inhabitant of Mauritania" (northwest Africa, a region now corresponding to northern Algeria and Morocco), from Greek Mauros, perhaps a native name, or else cognate with mauros "black" (but this adjective only appears in late Greek and may as well be from the people's name as the reverse). Being a dark people in relation to Europeans, their name in the Middle Ages was a synonym for "Negro;" later (16c.-17c.) used indiscriminately of Muslims (Persians, Arabs, etc.) but especially those in India.

Lets pull out a section of this definition because it is vital to our Hellenistic-Judaic connection,“from Greek Mauros, perhaps a native name, or else cognate with mauros "black" (but this adjective only appears in late Greek and may as well be from the people's name as the reverse).” By reading this portion of the etymological breakdown isolated, four critical things become clear and that is:

1.     Mauros is thought to be a native name of people already existent 
2.     It shows only the possible connection with the word “maurus” (notice the letter “M” is not capitalized) which became one of the Greek words for black (More distant cognates include Latin flagrare ("to blaze, glow, burn"), and Ancient Greek phlegein ("to burn, scorch"). The Ancient Greeks sometimes used the same word to name different colors, if they had the same intensity. Kuanos' could mean both dark blue and black.)[5]
3.     That this Mauros or mauros only appears in a later form of the Greek language
4.     And just to add, it states that the name Moor also became "indiscriminately" used for Moslems who were "Persians, Arabs, etc. but especially those in India."

In tracing earlier etymological breakdowns of the word Moor, we find that it does not define the word Moor to mean “black” but “dark.”[6] This is critical on so many levels. At first, the Europeans would simply refer to us (so-called "black" people) as "Moors" because that is the historical ethnic name for our people, but as the Mohammedan religion spread, they (The Europeans) modified this name and began to call our people “Black-a-Moors”. Now here is a question of logic; if Moor means black which so many have falsely intimated but have never proven, why would they call us “Black-a-Black” if Moor already means black? Think people, simply think. Your scholars cannot reason a thing out for you, you must do that on your own. Next, we have to find the Greek word for black being that the professional etymologists who have 74 sources at their disposal, could not prove at all that Moor means black and if it meant black, then why in the world would it be used indiscriminately for Persians, Arabs Hindu’s etc? 

One of the earliest Greek words for black is melanos. We use this meaning because it does mean black and Moors claim that melanin is what makes their skin black. Let us look at what melanos says in this same online etymological dictionary and follow the trace to the word melanin.

melano-meaning "black," from Greek melano-, comb. form of melas (genitive melanos) "black, dark, murky" (see melanin).

melanin (n.)dark brown or black pigment found in animal bodies, 1832, Modern Latin, with chemical suffix -in (2); first element from Greek melas (genitive melanos) "black," from PIE root *mel- (2) "of darkish color" (cognates: Sanskrit malinah "dirty, stained, black," Lithuanian melynas "blue," Latin mulleus "reddish"). Related: Melanism; melanistic.

There are several things to note here; in the definition of melano- there are three different aspects given and they are "black, dark, murky". This means that any of these definitions can apply to someone who is dark skinned however, being that no man is actually black, we have to eliminate black and stick with dark or murky. Now anything can be dark; you can have dark blue, dark red, dark green etc., however, in this case, because "murky" is used, we get a clearer conception of what is being relayed. If you review the melanin of human beings under a microscope, it is a murky dark brown that appears to give a darkish murky appearance. Melanin itself is defined as a "dark brown or black pigment." In the image below, we match up the dark brown skin of this tribes man of one of the countries of Africa (lost my source for the image), with a melanin sample taken from a melanoma specimen.

Melanin pigment (light refracting granular material - center of image) in a pigmented melanoma. Courtesy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanin

So the Greek word melanos when it applies “murky” is in fact more suitable than using “black” which in this instance, we would not rule out “dark” because the man in the picture is a dark brown. Contrast that with the images of the light skinned entertainers in image 3 and it becomes evident that we are dealing with a psychological issue and not anything based on a scientific or an anthropological model of which we have shown already in the beginning of this treatise.

This is important because the "Alexandrian tongue" sprung from the "Koine" Greek and developed after the conquests of Alexander of Macedonia whom Europeans call "great" (roughly 336-323 BCE) and this form of the language had underwent far-reaching changes.[7] Ironically, this is the same exact period that the people of Joshua who are called Jews today (Yahwists), came in contact with the Hellenes. The Hellenes and those who became Jews developed a strong relationship and did trade and commercial business together. The two cultures basically became merged[8], which gives us a clue as to the racial identity of those Joshuaites whom we call Jews today and the ethnicity of the Hellenes is obvious. Christianity today is a remixed, monotheistic version of Hellenism and these two systems are still connected till this day. From this relationship, Ptolemy II had the Septuagint (meaning "70" interpreters of the Hebrew Bible written in Koine Greek) penned based on this relationship. From the descendants of Joshua (so-called Jews today) came the racists provisions of the Torah with the Canaanites who were in fact the peoples that became the Africans and it is from (Yahwists called Jews today) this author strongly feels that the Hellenes adopted how the people who composed the Torah saw the Moor (black and evil) and became the driving force behind racist Christianity and its wars with the Moabites or the Moors of North Africa and subsequently Mohammedanism (Islam) in general. Dark brown skin was called black and blackness was always associated with evil and death. Proof is truth.

Jeremiah 13:23 Taken from the 1599 Geneva Bible (GNV) (That is, before the King James Version)
"Can the black Moor change his skin? or the leopard his spots, then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil?"

 Black is a noun, not an adjective.

We were all taught in public school the eight parts of speech. Most of us forget these aspects of language when we reach adulthood (This author had to actually look them up) and so we sort of forget their functions in our daily discourse. The three parts of speech that most people do remember however are nouns, verbs, and adjectives. We know that verbs usually describes actions; run, walk, talk, something happening, etc. We know that nouns represents persons, places, and things; and we know that an adjective describes a noun. For instance: Cynthia (noun) has black hair and long legs (adjective=describing Cynthia). With this fresh on your mind, let’s review the definition of the word “black” according to Dictionary.com:

Black (adjective)
1. lacking hue and brightness; absorbing light without reflecting any of the rays composing it.
2. characterized by absence of light; enveloped in darkness:
a black night.3. (sometimes initial capital letter)
a.       pertaining or belonging to any of the various populations characterized by dark skin pigmentation, specifically the dark-skinned peoples of Africa, Oceania, and Australia.b.      African American.4. soiled or stained with dirt:
That shirt was black within an hour.
5. gloomy; pessimistic; dismal:
a black outlook.6. deliberately; harmful; inexcusable:
a black lie.7. boding ill; sullen or hostile; threatening:
black words; black looks.Synonyms
1. dark, dusky; sooty, inky; swart, swarthy; sable, ebony. 4. dirty, dingy.5. sad, depressing, somber, doleful, mournful, funereal. 7. disastrous, calamitous. 9. sinful, inhuman, fiendish, devilish, infernal, monstrous; atrocious, horrible; nefarious, treacherous, traitorous, villainous.
Antonyms
1. white. 4. clean. 5. hopeful, cheerful.

As a noun, it says the same exact thing on this particular website which matches up with just about every other online dictionary and every physical dictionaries that you will peruse pertaining to the definition for the word black:

noun20. the color at one extreme end of the scale of grays, opposite to white, absorbing all light incident upon it.
Compare white (def 19).
21. (sometimes initial capital letter)

1. a member of any of various dark-skinned peoples, especially those of Africa, Oceania, and Australia.

1. Often Offensive. African American.

22. black clothing, especially as a sign of mourning:
He wore black at the funeral.

Clearly, anyone can see that black in this instance is being described as both a person (noun) and describing the person (adjective). How can this be? If a Moor, who is being called “black” was truly that, then his/her skin would no doubt be black, right? How could a light skinned person adjectively (descriptively) be called black? Remember growing up, if a brother or sister was light skinned, sometimes depending on their hair color etc, we would describe that person as either "high yellow" and "red boned." Now, think of the psychology people, how do we use the same noun to call a people black while at the same time an adjective to describe the same exact people, and then blindly look at lighter skinned peoples of our ethnicity and use terms like "high yellow" and "red boned"? European psychology, that's how. Let us look at the images of some famous light skinned “black” people to see if this makes any sense:     

Do these people have ACTUAL black skin?

Also, if you noticed for the noun aspect of the definition black, "they" put "Often Offensive. African American" in the same exact meaning. They did not even try to separate the two. If you cannot see the mental "duping" going here, it is because you choose not to because you are beholden to an ideology that dictates that you are black all because your leader guy or scholar  or movement said so. If this is so, then we cannot be mad at those of our people who worship an image of a European Jesus for the same hand wields both, the "black" identity and the Euro Jesus.

" Let us revisit a part of the definition pertaining to black when it says “the color at one extreme end of the scale of grays, opposite to white, absorbing all light incident upon it.” Below is an image of two things, a black square and a gray scale image spoken about in the aforementioned definition of black.

                   

                                                                 

By looking at the black square above and comparing it with the images of the light skinned entertainers in the image prior, we can, without a shadow of a doubt conclude that the use of the term black as an adjective is wrong! Now look at the grayscale image above and then go back and look at the image of the light skinned entertainers again. Where would they fit in on this scale? If you thought to yourself “nowhere” then you are correct. This grayscale is a natural image of white either darkening or black either fading in the same spectrum of which these two extremes exist. A European person would not match any of the “white” swatches either so this brings us to the most interesting of questions, so simple that an insightful third grader would conjure it up and that is; if a so-called "black" man had a baby with a so-called "white" woman (or vice versa) wouldn’t the baby produced by such a mixture be "gray" like the same gray shown in the middle of gray scale image above? Black and white when mixed makes gray; we learned this probably in the 1^st or 2^nd grade. The grayscale image above proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt. Understand the simple psychological process that we have been fooled by. This author proves that “White Supremacy” is a myth and that “European psychology” is what we are dealing with. No one is black so adjectively, you cannot describe them as such and being that no one is black, we cannot say that black is a noun insofar as persons are concerned. If you are saying you are a “black man” you are saying “a devil”, or more aptly, the living dead. Also, process this simple use of logic; most trees have green leaves and brown bark; and yet, we call it a “tree” and not a “green-brown”. The notion that humans are described in such a way is absolutely absurd and highlights unequivocally what we call “European psychology”.

Imagine calling a tree a "green-brown" instead of a "tree."

These descriptions that we use for ourselves, and the Europeans, and other nations, come directly from Europeans and I will give the most exemplary of examples that I can give. Now I want to show you all how the European psychology works insofar as literary works are concerned. The citation below is taken from a book entitled “Researches Into the Physical History of Mankind: Physical ethnography of the African races” By James Cowles Prichard:

SECTION I. – Of the Barábra or Berberins.* “THE people who inhabit the valley of the Nile above Egypt, and from that country to Senaan, give themselves the appellation of Berberi. By the Arabs they are termed Núba. The same people in Egypt, where they are well known, are called Berberins.”
 “Denon has thus described them : he says, “their skin is of a shining and jet-black, exactly similar to that of antique bronzes. They have not the smallest resemblance to the Negroes in the western parts of Africa. Their eyes are deep set, and sparkling, with the browns hanging over, the nose pointed; the nostrils are large, the mouth wide, the lips of moderate thickness and the hair and beard in small quantity, and hanging in little locks.”[emphasis mines]

When the author of the above works cites a man named “Denon”, he is speaking about Baron Dominique Vivant Denon (1747-1825) who was a French artist, writer, diplomat, author, and archaeologist. I am not sure if you caught what he said in given a description of the people being analyzed when he said that these people are “jet-black” but describes their skin as “exactly similar to that of antique bronzes.”  My question to everyone reading this treatise is this; how can something that is bronze, be jet-black at the same exact time? Do you not see the trickery that has been played upon you? Most people would have read right past this particular description because the European psychology has worked on them so well, it is so embedded within their psyche, that they have accepted something that is clearly brownish as black. Look at your skin again. If you look below you will see images of antique bronzes (and you can google them yourself) which will give you all an example of what Denon described as was cited by Pritchard.

This is how "jet black" looks??? Would you still deny your eyes based on someone else's definition of you?

Are not the images above closely similar to the skin tone of those whom are called "black" people? How then can one with bronze colored (brownish) skin be black? Nouns and adjectives are thrown out of the window when it comes to defining and describing you Moors. Yes, your proper ethnic name is MOOR. They have defined your existence. Your leaders and learned men, your men of letters, your activists and scholars, they by proxy of mere belief, keep the grip of European psychology on the minds of the Moors of America. They admit it ever so boldly when they call what is clearly "European psychology" by the grandiose title of "White Supremacy". "The only form of slavery that you have now is mental slavery" said our Prophet Noble Drew Ali.

Well what about “African American”? Surely this is a much better term, right? Wrong! How can one in their right mind call themselves an “African American”? Which part of Africa do you come from? Africa has over fifty four (54) distinct nations with dozens of langauges and tribes dotted within those nations and in between. Did you take a DNA test to determine exactly which geographical or tribal peoples you specifically descend from, that's if you prefer the term African American? If you descended from Nigeria for instance, wouldn’t it be more proper to call yourself a "Nigerian American"? Do you believe if you walked up to a man in Mozambique for instance, and asked him his nationality that he would say “African”? Does this make sense to you and do you see the point? 

This concludes this brief summary which is a part of a larger book that is being written now for the solutions that our people need for their resurrection. I welcome all SERIOUS rebuttals to this tract only. I will not entertain the oft-quoted pseudoscience like "black is the combination of all colors in existence" or "black is the supreme state of being" etc., etc., etc. If you are coming to rebut this piece, simply prove that you are a black person by using your own self as the proof. Time to wake up my people. Tag a friend.
Peace
Sheik Way-El
Grand Sheik & Divine Minister
Moorish Science Temple of America

[1] DIRECTIVE NO. 15 RACE AND ETHNIC STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL STATISTICS AND ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTING

(as adopted on May 12, 1977) http://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/populations/bridged-race/directive15.html

[2] "He subdued the nimble blackamoors, not wrongly named 'the painted people.'" pg. 46 Ancient and Modern Britons: A Retrospect, Volume 1, David MacRitchie (K. Paul, Trench & Company, 1884)

[3] Wars 4.10.21–22, By Procopius of Caesarea (Even the critique of Procopius finds yields extra-biblical sources, although Christian. See “Procopius' Phoenician Inscriptions: Never Lost, Not Found.” Palestine Excavation Quarterly (London) 139, no. 2 (2007): 99-104, with a rejoinder by Anthony Frendo." 

http://www.academia.edu/1132493/_Procopius_Phoenician_Inscriptions_Never_Lost_Not_Found._Palestine_Excavation_Quarterly_London_139_no._2_2007_99-104_with_a_rejoinder_by_Anthony_Frendo)

[4] From Babylon to Timbuktu: A History of Ancient Black Races Including the Black Hebrews By Rudolph R. Windsor (2011, Author House, first published in 1969), pg. 28

[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black#Etymology_and_language

[6] New international encyclopædia, Second edition, Volume 16, published 1918

[7] History of the Greek Language http://www.greek-language.com/History.html

[8] The unedited full-text of the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/7535-hellenism

NAR OR MOOR? AN ANSWER FOR ISHMAEL BEY. ALSO, UNITING THE MOABITES AND ISRAELITES.

Islam, peace and greetings to you all.

I rise giving all Praise to Allah and the highest of honors to His Holy and Divine Prophet Noble Drew Ali. I extend honors to the Harbinger and Forerunner, Marcus Mosiah Garvey. I extend honors to all true and Divine Prophets and I extend honors to you all for when man honors man, he honors his Father, God-Allah.

In this exposition, this researcher, Sheik Way-El, aka Lord Abba, will attempt to bring some light to a find given by one of the few brothers that I have grown to respect from the Amen Ra Squad, that being, Ishmael Bey.

He had brought an interesting find to my attention a few years ago pertaining to the Wolof word for Moor which is “Nar”. His finds came from a book called “The Devil's Lane: Sex and Race in the Early South” edited by Catherine Clinton and Michele Gillespie. In it, on page 243 we find:

“Nar, the Wolof name for Moor, means “burn,” a preferred technique of warfare among the Moors. The nation designation Nar is found on Louisiana documents dating from the Spanish period (1770-1803).”[1]

The above citation is critical in so many regards when compared to records in Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia, where Moors are cited on the legal records which means that there were many of our people who knew that they were Moors as opposed to Negroes and Black people. References of the Nar, can be found among old sources of the 1800’s relayed by European writers in their (rather skewed) field studies of the peoples of the land of Africa where Moors are called “Nar nation” by tribes in Senegal that the Europeans list as Oulao and Biffeche (Bisseche?)[2]

This lends support to a theory that this author makes when he posits that there is a thread of traditional knowledge that was passed down from the first people on this earth who are in fact the Moors about their most ancient appellation to each generation or civilization and these are the adept artificers and builders of the ancient world whose model we have used today to build the modern world. Such is not the subject of this treatise and so it will not be extended in this treatise however, to get a glimpse at what I speak in curt detail, please review my blog called THE MOORS CAME FROM THE SACRED MOUNT MERU. 

According to an online Wollof - English Dictionary, we find for the word Nar:

naar

(n) Moor, Arabic descent. Naar yu bari ci Gambia bi Muritani leñu jogee. Many Mooris in the Gambia came from Mouritania.[3]

In the above cited, we see that the very name Naar is said to derive from Arabic descent. The Arabic word for fire is in fact Nar (نار) which is a derivative of the noun Nur (نور) which means “luminosity”. The Hebrew word for fire is esh (אש) however, the Hebrew word for light is pronounced “Owr” (אור) which corresponds with luminosity and in the Aramaic dialect, which is closer to the Arabic in general, we have nwr for the word fire[4]. It is clear that all of these are cognates and would undoubtedly have sprung from its parent language which is the Moabite language Mudar from whence the Aramaic, the Hebrew, the Syriac, and the Arabic dialects directly derive.

The Hebrew word for light OWR is spelled "aleph vav resh" (אור) which produces the sound RUT.  We will revisit this “rut”, later on. Jesus or Yeshua is called in the Hebrew Ohr Ha-Olam which translates as “the Light of the World”. We will connect this to the aleph vav resh or “rut” as well.

A very curious but logical question has to be asked and that is; how does the Wolof and other tribes of that region come to call these Moors by the appellation Nar which is simply said to be some sort of special firefighting technique, if, these tribes do not speak Arabic? Did these Arabic speaking Moors tell these tribes and nations that this was their name? Can we find any records of these Moors who spoke Arabic referring to themselves as Nar? Does the word Nar even relate to the word Moor? From this, this researcher will do his best to put the pieces of this puzzle together.

In spoken language the world over, going back to ancient dialects like the Egyptian, the letter N and M are interchangeable and they represent what is known as “nasals”. The alveolar nasal is a type of consonantal sound used in numerous spoken languages. The symbol in the International Phonetic Alphabet that represents dental, alveolar, and postalveolar nasals is 〈n〉, and the equivalent X-SAMPA (Extended Speech Assessment Methods Phonetic Alphabet) symbol is (n). The vast majority of languages have either an alveolar or dental nasal. There are a few languages that lack either sound but have [m] (e.g. colloquial Samoan). There are some languages (e.g., Rotokas) that lack both [m] and [n].[5]

In our case, in terms of this exposition, where we are using Hebrew and Aramaic and Arabic chiefly, these interchangeable letters (N & M) are called “Edenics”. We all know the part of the pledge of allegiance where it says “and amber waves of grain…”, but did you know that the word aMber comes from Arabic aNbar and in this; we have a clear example of an M and N nasal interchange. In the Hebrew it is Nun (N) and Mem (M) and these are interchangeable in many of the Hebrew words and we find this occurrence in our English and many languages around the world. There are many unacknowledged Nun words that gave us English M words, including the elM tree from the ilaN (shade tree), or the moron from the NaR (youth). Just as Greek moros (foolish) developed from moro (child), a foolish adult in Yiddish is accused of NaR(ishkeit).[6] The last sentence is ripe with things that this author could touch on but that would add another 3-4 pages to this treatise however, you clearly see the expression of mor and nar expressed as a word meaning “youth” made into cognates of other words in later languages and dialects.

What this researcher believes that we have with owr, or ohr and its several variations, is what is known in spoken language studies as a voiceless alveolar nasal sound where the N and M are silent. Theoretically, we can deduce based on what we have above that, Nar can in fact be the same as Moor and is quite possible, that this term in some form derived from a pidgin of transplant and spoken languages in the aforementioned African regions. How about the root of the Arabic word Nar which is Nur which is pronounced ‘noor’? Can we then, based on the above language breakdown use the Mwr (moor) instead? I want to stress, this is only theoretical however, we still have not, nor can we reconcile the fact that these Wolof and other Moors speaking their own dialect, called the Arabic speaking Moors by the Arabic name Nar. What this author also failed to mention also is that the Wolof word for fire is listed as boi, to illuminate is niit and to burn is lakk[7]. But what about the other word for Moor according to the Wolof dictionary which is Amet? The Wolof to English dictionary has this:

Amet (n) Moor. Amet bi Muriani la jónée. The Moore is from Muritania.[8]

This researcher does not believe that the appellation Nar is based on some special fire technique, as the authors of the cited source “The Devil's Lane: Sex and Race in the Early South”, never gave an example or a historical reference, and this researcher has found no instances as to why the Wolof Moors called these Arabic speaking Moors Nar (outside of the Devil’s Lane reference) especially when we have cited in the referenced Wolof to English dictionary another name in the Wolof for the word Moor. If my research fell short in this regard, I look forward to a fill in the blanks in this respect.

So what happens when we take the position of the voiceless nasal and make silent or even remove the N or the M off of Nar or even Moor? We are left with OOR for the word Moor that we have today, and AR for the Wolof word for Moor (Nar) as cited above. This OOR, that is without the M, would be the exact identical in pronunciation for the Hebrew oor which means luminosity, or light. And then we have to look at the ar aspect of the above hypothesis and this is where “connect the dots” becomes the enjoyable part of this research project.

Biblical narratives posit that the ancient city of Moab was called “Ar” which is a direct phonetic contradistinction to “Ur” of Chaldees, the birthplace of Abraham who is the father of the multitudes. Just by pronouncing the words Ar and Ur and what is stated in the last paragraphs illuminates itself rather brightly; pun intended. Let us now closely analyze the word Ur, its relationship with Ar, and the various definitions associated with it: 

• ·    Light - The Hebrew word “Ur” is thought by many to mean “flame”. This may be derived from the Hebrew word ‘owr, which means “illumination or (concrete) luminary” light.” (OT:216 Strong's Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary) 
•  ·    Waking - The implication of “light” may be the origin of the Hebrew word ‘ur, which means “opening the eyes, to wake.” (OT:5782 Strong's Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary) One lexicon defines this as “a place guarded by waking or a watch) in the widest sense (even of a mere encampment or post).” (OT:5892 Strong's Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary) 
•  ·        City – The implication of “waking” may be the origin of the Hebrew word `iyr which is translated as “city”. One lexicon states, “Various other etymologies have been proposed: some taking the word as the Sanskrit ur, a town, or even the Hebrew ‘iyr.” (“UR” McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia) The Moabite word ‘Ar means “city.” (“AR” McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia) The Hebrew word Uru appears to be related and is defined as “city.” (OT:3389 Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon) A reference work describing the origin of the word “Jerusalem” states, “The oldest known form, Uru-sa-lim, has been considered by many to mean the ‘City of Peace.’” (“JERUSALEM” International Standard Bible Encyclopedia) 
•  ·      The chief city - These references may indicate that Ur was not simply a city of the Chaldeans, but was the CHIEF city of the Chaldees. The Moabites named their CHIEF CITY by the related word ‘Ar. One reference describes ‘Ar as “The chief city (as the name means) of Moab.” (“Ar” Fausset's Bible Dictionary) 

Another reference work states, “The Chaldeans were a warlike, aggressive people from the mountains of Kurdistan. Apparently they were Haldians (or Khaldians).” (“CHALDEANS” The New Unger's Bible Dictionary) This derivation may indicate that the Chaldeans were descendants of the one who “captured” many of the cities of Mesopotamia. Perhaps the phrase “Ur of the Chaldeans” should best be translated as “the chief city of the one(s) who capture”.

There are so many intriguing aspects noted in the above. In the above definitions, the second one given shows that Ar also means “Waking”. We can then assert that the very name Ar is directly connected to an eye which we can trace back to the name of the Egyptian sun god Ra (hard not to notice that Ra appears to be Ar backwards) where we get the epithet “The eye of Ra” and Ra being the sun god, would give us our light and luminosity.

 

Glyph of Amen-Ra showing sun disc

Various sources conclude that the eye of Ra comes to earth as a vengeful deity in the form of Sehkmet, as Ra was too old and weak too take vengeance upon those who mocked him. Sehkmet comes from the Egyptian word sehkem which translates as “power” and so her name is connected to the Egyptian word for eye which we will show below. In brief, this account is interesting because Sehkmet comes in the form of a lion. We will touch on this “lion” aspect later on in this discourse.

This connection is absolutely hard to ignore or dismiss. Osiris, whose name can be read as was+ir, where the eye appears to represent the sound 'ir' (ir=ar/ur?) seems to illumine this idea.

Glyph of Osiris. The eye represents the sound "iyr" like "ear"

According to James P. Allen, Wilbour Professor of Egyptology and Ancient Western Asian Studies for Brown University, the word for eye is “Ila” in the Oromo language[9]  which can be deduced to the consonant shift from the R to the L, common when transliterations are made from the Egyptian to the Proto-Semetic languages as they are called. According to Massey, Ar becomes Al in the "Semetic" tongue which gives us the word El[10] and, the fact that the Moorish Americans today trace their descendants as the ancient Moabites who inhabited the Northwestern and the Southwestern shores of Africa and, the fact that they wear annexed to their given names 'EL' for their national designation (much like Jews have "stein" as the root of their surnames) the parallels astound. 

Among early scholars, the three oldest peoples in the world were the Ethiopians, the Egyptians, and the Arii. The double 'ii' is a Roman suffix denoting plurality but would undoubtedly stem from the Egyptian long ‘e’ (EE) (ee) sound for plurality. Apuleius, the famous Latin prose writer who was half Berber and half European, in his book The Golden Ass, cites a text where Isis is allegedly edifying herself. It says: 

“[T]he Ethiopians, the Arii and the Egyptians skilled in ancient learning, worshiping me by ceremonies perfectly appropriate, call me by my true name, Queen Isis.” (M.P. Hall 1926 pp. 119-120)

Gerald Massey in his The Natural Genesis: Two Volumes in One on page 22 says this of the Arii: 

“So far from the Aryan name having begun with the so-called Aryan race of Central Asia it is as old as the naming of the gods of the earliest orbit, the brotherhood of the seven stars. The Ari in Egyptian are the companions, the watchers who became the seven Kab-ari, as the Ari of Kheb (Egypt), or from Kab (Eg.) to revolve together. The Ari of Khep or Heb would account for the name of the Iberii in Africa and Ireland, and the Kam-ari, or Kymry or Wales. The Ari were Kamite Blacks before they were the Median Arioi or the Aryas of India. Apuleius mentions the Arii as an African race together with the Ǽthiopians or Kushites of the Persian Gulf, and the Egyptians. The Ari are also found as the Zingari, the European Attu-arii, Bioo-arii, Chattu-arii, Petu-arii, Ingu-arii, Bav-ari, Bulg-ari and other of this type-name, which was not derived from the Saxon Ware, for men. The Ari or Arya brotherhood had gone out over the world in the earliest times and was carried forth by and as the black people.” The Natural Genesis: Two Volumes in One By Gerald Massey pg. 22 (republished in 2011)

Several things we note in Massey’s explanation above and that is:

• 1.      He calls the Ari “Kamite Blacks” with Kamite denoting Ham.
• 2.     That he calls the Ari “companions” will match up with a later part of this exposition
• 3.     That he calls them also Iberii. Can this be an allusion to Iber or Eber from where the word Hebrew might derive?
• 4.     That he cites Apuleius who lived between 125-180 A.D. as was shown in our source above from Manly P. Hall’s works, directly connecting the Ari with the Cushites and the Egyptians
• 5.     That the people historically called Aryan are not the founders of this name, but are usurpers
• 6.     That these people, the Ari were the ones that went out into the world in the earliest times and he notes them by the accepted misnomer “black people”

All of the above points deserve much more inquiry than this paper allows however, this researcher thought it best to point these out to accentuate the very purpose of this discourse as this researcher believes that Ar, Ur, Nar, and Moor are all interrelated words that developed from the earliest times across many languages remaining linguistically similar through various language pidgins.

This sheds so much light on this word “Ar” which is also called a city of the Moabites in the biblical narrative. Just by looking at Ar in the singular and then using ancient pluralization, we would undoubtedly be called collectively, the “Ari/Arii”. Gerald Massey in the above says that these Ari or Arya where we would undoubtedly get the word Aryan from today, were in fact a “black” people and that they had gone out and carried this forth to the rest of the world. Ham and Ethiopian, or Ham and Cush, are used exclusively to refer to Moors whom are falsely called by the misnomer “black” people in modern academia and so to relate, according to Massey’s versions of events, it is these Arii that carried civilization to the whole world. These would have been the Cushites, or Hamites, two names connected with hot, or fervent, which later became “sunburnt” with the advent of the later name Ethiopian given by the Greeks. Ethiopian means SUNDERED AND TWAIN or “something divided”[11] and was later made to mean sunburnt to refer to the dark skins of the Moors as the same way the Judaic codex writers translates Cush or Cushi to mean black. These meanings, black and sunburnt, are what are known as false cognates given our people. Those with Eyes Wide Open are here to set things back in the proper order.

It becomes clear via the biblical narrative that the placing of the Moabites in the city of Ar albeit the bible's historical events are largely actual accounts greatly distorted and which are told eponymously and as etiological myths, is merely connecting the Moabites to the most ancient branch of mankind in a way that the biblical codex writers were adept at doing. We Moorish American Moslems of the M.S. T. of A. teach that the Moors were the first people of the world and that Moor and Moabite are synonymous terms.[12] [13] 

Let us now look at some of the other breakdowns of the word OWR as the Hebrew word for light and other meanings:

·        05782. `uwr, oor; ayin vav resh;

a primitive root (rather identical with 5783 through the idea of opening the eyes); to wake (literally or figuratively):--(a- )wake(-n, up), lift up (self), X master, raise (up), stir up (self).

·        See Hebrew 05783 (`uwr) ayin vav resh;

a primitive root; to (be) bare:--be made naked.

Hab 3:9 only use;

·        05785. `owr, ore; ayin vav resh;

from 5783; skin (as naked); by implication, hide, leather:--hide, leather, skin. See Hebrew 05783 (`uwr)

·        0216. 'owr, ore; aleph vav resh

from 215; illumination or (concrete) luminary (in every sense, including lightning, happiness, etc.):--bright, clear, + day, light (-ning), morning, sun.

·        See Hebrew 0215 ('owr) aleph vav resh;

a primitive root; to be (causative, make) luminous (literally and metaphorically):--X break of day, glorious, kindle, (be, en-, give, show) light (-en, -ened), set on fire, shine.

The phonetic similarity of the root of these words is remarkable. Even with the aleph/ayin difference, the pronunciation is almost indistinguishable. It is however, hard for this researcher who is not versed in the Hebrew language to fully give a breakdown in this regard, nevertheless, we must highlight these instances and use our common sense and stand to be corrected if we err.

We also find among early Christian writers where the Moors of North West and South West Africa that invaded Spain are collectively called “Chaldeans”[14] and the relationship between Ur, the ancient home of Abraham, and Ar again irradiate themselves brightly and the parallel, also, connected in name and actual personages, is weighty to ignore and chalk up as fanciful conflations.

So we see above in the first listed from the Concordance that the Hebrew oor alludes to an eye, or the opening of the eyes or to awaken. This can be directly related to the morning hours when the sun and its penetrating light or luminosity first appears to light the portion of the world that it shines on.  Remember that this researcher said earlier that this is enjoyable, putting this type of research together because it opens up so many thoughts, ideas, other avenues to research, and in some cases, concrete facts that cannot be disputed.

From this, I want to bring you to the sons of Judah according to the Biblical narrative. Judah had 5 sons, 3 by a Canaanite woman (Genesis 38:2) who is simply called Beth-Shua. We will stick with the three sons of the Canaanite woman for this exposition. These sons are:

• ·        Er
• ·        Onan
• ·        Shelah

The breakdowns to these names are so intriguing, coupled with the fact that Judah, an Israelite tribe but listed eponymously as an actual human male, married and had sons by a Canaanite which is forbidden according to the Biblical narrative (Genesis 26:34–35; 28:8; Ezra 9–10 to name a few), however, we will leave these alone in this note but rest assured, in future works we will highlight these things in depth and prove how the Biblical narrative was written to shift around the connection between Moab and Israel and script them as sworn enemies to each other. This author feels this is blatantly false in will show and prove in future works.

Let us get back to the sons of Judah, in particular, the son named Er. I have scanned the below from out of my Smith’s Bible Dictionary which unfortunately, has no publishing date and based on matching up some of the meanings, I have traced it between (1966-77) however, based on some of the sources cited, it could be earlier.

 Notice that the name Er means watchful.  The same exact name in the Strong’s Concordance appears as it appears above in connection to this name meaning or relating to an eye and also light, bare, naked and hide. Can this hide referring to skin be a play on the Adam and Eve story when it said that they hid themselves from the Lord (Genesis 3:7) and the God of the Bible asked them why did they cover themselves, cover their nakedness (Gen. 3:10-11)? Was this subtle racism to show the skin as a badge of shame? Can this somehow be the codex writer’s allusion that the very first people were in fact Moors? Remember, there are two different Adams in the Bible, one is created on the sixth day (Gen. 1:26-31), and one is created on the seventh day (Gen. 2:7). Is not Prophet Jesus connected to Adam and called “the light of the world”? What about the word for lamb in the New Testament Greek which is amnos[15] but there are several instances, where this word is listed as arnion[16] from the Greek arni for lamb. Doesn’t arnion sound a lot like Arnon, the river of the Moabites in the Biblical city of Ar? Prophet Noble Drew Ali says that Prophet Jesus is of the TRUE BLOOD of Moabites and Canaanites and the inhabitants of Africa[17]. Prophet Jesus represents the lamb spoken of in Revelation however, in Revelations, he is called “the strong lion of Judah” (Revelation 5:5) and lion in the Hebrew can be found as Ari and the Greek word for lamb in Revelations, almost exclusively, besides one reference in the book of John, is arnion[18]. This researcher feels strongly that these are clues hidden right in our very faces. There is no coincidence that our brother Ishmael Bey found this word Nar for it lead to this exposition and a connection of the dots that the rulers and the rich, the concealers of our history would not have ever thought we would connect.

What about the city cited in the Bible called Aroer which was taken from Sihon, the king of the Amorites (Joshua 13:9) situated 35 miles north of the river Arnon? Here we connect the Amorites with a city apparently named in based on some derivation of Ar. The bible dictionaries including the one that I have translates the city Aroer as “ruins”. What is so odd about this is that many cities that were destroyed or left desolate are given the translation “ruins” by their translators so we know for an absolute fact that this cannot be the name as the Hebrew name for ruins is galal (gaw-lal') cited from Strong’s 1556 a primitive root; to roll (literally or figuratively):--commit, remove, roll (away, down, together), run down, seek occasion, trust, wallow. This is how you pull the cover off of the secrets.

What about this other interesting notion that, like shown by Massey above, where the R and the L are interchangeable and so, it can conceivably be insinuated that Er is another way of saying El. Is this an impossibility? Is not Er the son of Bath-Shua, a Canaanite woman whose namesake is also listed as the mother of Solomon (1Chron. 3:5)?  Isn’t the Canaanite God called by the most ancient name of El? Isn’t El, from whence the word Allah derives, the ancient name for God in general? This author would love a written critique in the form of rebuttal of these points made if any could be put together in this regard.

Er, in the Strong’s Concordance, also connects with the Moabite city Ar and Ai[19] and other uses for the name variant Ar that the codex writers use to mean “enemy” which is what the codex writers of the old Testament did, they took original names, and gave them derogatory meanings. To not belabor this point, we bring you to another of the sons of Judah not by the Canaanite woman called Zarah. Zarah is the self-same as Zerah and Zara who is listed as a Cushite or an Ethiopian.

Notice that Zerah is said to mean “a rising of light” which is the self-same as the Arabic word Zahra or Zahara and the same as the Hebrew Zohar where we get the Kabbalistic texts from. 

What is interesting to note is that, this is the name of a Cushite king said to have invaded Judah. Common sense tells us that these Cushites were more than likely not trying to invade Judah, but take it back since 2^nd Chronicles is written well after the book of Joshua in the biblical chronology. So I know that one reading this might be asking “how can he so confidently come to say that this Cushite is not invading Judah, but trying to take it back?” I get this a lot as I am often accused of trying to squeeze a square peg in a round hole but these accusations never come in written rebuttals, just Facebook or YouTube comments.

I now turn your attention the fact that the Prophet Noble Drew Ali said that the Moors were driven out of their homeland by Joshua, the robber son of Nun. In Windsor’s From Babylon to Timbuctoo, we cite:

“these Canaanites of Africa were driven out of the land of Canaan by Joshua. About 332 B.C. Alexander conquered Palestine. As stated above, the Africans came to Alexander claiming that the land of Canaan belonged to them. The point that I want to elucidate is that these Canaanites considered themselves Africans. We can correctly say that the Hebrew-Canaanite language is one of the African languages.”[20]

Rudolph Windsor, drawing from the Babylonian Talmud (compiled over the period of Late Antiquity 3rd to 5th centuries), correctly posits that the Africans were in fact descended from ancient Canaan which is not only the region called Palestine today, but this author asserts based on hours of research, also includes all of Arabia and parts of present day Iraq. The Babylonian Talmud relays the account like this:

“The rabbis taught: On the twenty-fourth of Nissan the contractors of duty were taken off from Judah and Jerusalem. This was when the Africans summoned Israel before Alexander of Macedonia, claiming that the land of Canaan belonged to them. As it reads [Num. Xxxiv. 2]:

 "The land of Canaan according to its boundaries"-- and that they were the descendants of Canaan. Said Gbiah b. Psisa to the sages: Permit me, and I will appear before Alexander as advocate of the defendant Israel, and if they defeat me, say to them, "You have defeated an ignoramus among us"; and if I defeat them, say to them, "The law of Moses has defeated you." He got this permission, and did so. Then he said to them: What is your evidence? And their answer was: From your Torah. Then said he: “I in defence will also bring my evidence from the same. It reads [Gen. ix. 25]: "And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren." Now, to whom belongs the estate of a slave, if not to his master. And not this only, but I summon you before the king for the many years you have not done any service for us.” And Alexander commanded them to give answer, for which they requested from him three days' time. And he gave it to them. And as they could not find any right answer at the appointed time they fled, leaving their fields, which were sown, and their vineyards, which were planted. And this year was a Sabbatical one.”[21]

We also find Christian sources dating back to 298 – 373 A.D. where the Africans are mentioned as Canaanites by their own testimonies.

“In St. Athanasius’s time, the Africans still said they were descended from the Canaanites; and it is said, that the Punic tongue was almost entirely the same with the Canaantish and Hebrew languages.” [22]

The above makes it clear that the Africans wanted Canaan back and this is why these raids listed in the Bible by Taharka (2 Kings 19:9; Isaiah 37:9), Shishak (2 Chronicles 12:3) and other clearly Moorish or if you want to use the term African or even the misnomer “black” rulers, like Zerah are said to have gone to “invade” Judah and other renamed parts of these ancient places. Let us analyze this a little closely before we close out as it is all relative because the Africans or Cushites, also called “black” people, the same so called “black” people that Gerald Massey gives the name Ari to (which would also render Ali), cited in several sources above as a group of people who existed coeval with the Egyptians and Ethiopians meaning that, they were in fact Moors, the term that this author prefers to call our people as this author believes it is in fact the most ancient appellation of our people and the bible accounts these Moors trying to get their lands back.

In the case of Shishak, the king of Egypt, an actual historical figure existing outside of the Biblical narrative (some erroneously believe that all characters in the Bible are made up fictions) for instance, in 2Chronicles 12:3, is said to have gathered the Libyans, Sukkites or Sukkiim, and Cushites together for war to take the city of Judah. In the NIV Bible, the footnote says for Cushites “that is, people from the upper Nile region” meaning, the area called Sudan or Nubia today. The biblical verse reads:

 “Shishak king of Egypt attacked Jerusalem in the fifth year of King of Rehoboam. With twelve hundred chariots and sixty thousand horseman and the innumerable of Libyans, Sukkites and Cushites that came with him from Egypt, he captured the fortified cities of Judah and came as far as Jerusalem. ” 2Chronicles 12:2-4 NIV

 It is no doubt the race of the Libyans are Moors. I say that because there is some contention as to the race of the Libyans and this scholastic battle was waged in the book Golden Age of the Moor by Ivan Van Sertima where  Wayne B. Chandler challenged sister Dana Marniche’s (Reynolds) claims that the Libyans were a so called “black” people. Sister Dana Marniche gave the clearest of proofs while Wayne B. Chandler appeared to rely more on what was attributed to the Libyans by other writers as opposed to actually taking into account the in-depth sources that the sister Dana Marniche gave to solidify her argument and thus win that battle in this authors eyes. Be that as it may, we know without doubt who the Cushites are but this group, the Sukkites or the Sukkim, what about them?

Notice in the above scanned image that it gives as the meaning of these people as “dwelling in booths.” When we look at the context of what is being relayed here according to the biblical scholars; then this author makes a bold, yet unsupported assertion. The actual meaning of the word booths as is used in this regard, according to the same dictionary reads:

Booths: Huts made of branches of trees or other very perishable materials.

 Now, this bold assertion based on the contextual definition given above, is, that these represent your African tribes who are more or less your hunter gathering tribes whose civilization is based on a primitive sedentary (non-nomadic) lifestyle. This author says that it is these collectively who went and took Jerusalem which we can, based on the definitions given above, simply call Ur-Salem or Ar-Salem which is said to mean, “City of peace”. This author will also boldly assert that, these people collectively are the Moors (Nar, Ari), the Moabites, children (moro) of the father (ab), God, whom we today call Allah. Of connecting that name  moro with children or sons, this researcher has a bevy of information that he will present in the book THE MOABITES WHO ARE THE MOORS, OR THE WORLDS FIRST PEOPLE.

And this is why this author believes that Prophet Mohammed was sent, to finish the task of the breaking of the iron hand oppression of the pale skin nations of Europe who governed large portions of the Mideast and had made alliances with certain tribes in Arabia which formed the foundation of the Coptic church that had control of the southern portions of Arabia like Yemen during the 3rd century A.D.

And what of the name Arabia? It is written like this Ar’abia by the translators. Can it be that Ar-abia is in some way connected to the Moabite city Ar of the biblical narrative? Is it that the whole of Arabia represents the whole of the dominion of Moab? Is Ar-ab somehow connected to Mo’ab? Those familiar with my research know that I constantly show how the apostrophe (‘) in Mo’ab is there to represent the phoneme sound for ‘R’ thus giving the name of Mo’ab or Mo’ab (Mo[R]ab) which is the exact name of the Moors who took Spain and called by the Christian pens, Morabites and Almoravids with the latter denoting “The” (Al) Morav-ids or Morab-ids as the v and the b are interchangeable in the Hebrew and certain Berber dialects.[23]

If the Ar-ab hypothesis is just conflation by the author, why is there no settled etymology for word Arab or Arabia? The bible dictionaries merely list Arabia as “east country.” These words do not connect to the Hebrew word for east (qedem), or country (‘erets) so where does this translation come from? Notice in the below scanned image from the Smith’s Bible Dictionary that the word Ar which is NOT the real name of the city, its real name is Rabbath Moab which gives this researcher even more confidence that this is (Ar, same as Nar) is referencing the people themselves, who are anciently called the Ar or Ari, which can, by using the nasal context above, across time and language, be written is (N)ar, (M)ar, (N)oor, (M)oor, all meaning the same exact thing. Let me stress, this is this authors hypothesis.

Now we bring you to the Bible dictionary's definition of Ar:

Notice the second name listed Ara. It means lion. You will note also that Judah is in fact called Ari, another name for lion. Also notice the very 3^rd definition, Ar’ab which just happens to be another name for Judah. The definition says that the city is lost. Now, let us put the proverbial “two and two” together. You have a city in Arabia that is said to be lost, meaning cannot be located by modern means and, you have the word Arabia with no connectable linguistic etymology and so the codex writers give it the name east country. This researcher, based on what he has uncovered thus far in researching biblical names and places, feels that these were very shrewd cover ups to hide the race of the true Arabians, the people Ar, the people Nar, the people Moor. Look below at the scanned image of the definition of an Arabian. It says that a part of these nomads were the sons of Keturah, the 3^rd, barely mentioned wife of Abraham. Her ethnicity is unmistakably Moorish or what some of you may call by the misnomer “black”.

 Did you notice the name of the king “Aretas”? The online Strong’s Concordance in the Greek (the book Maccabees is revealed in the Greek) has:

 702. Aretas ar-et'-as of foreign origin; Aretas, an Arabian:--Aretas.

 Notice that it says “of foreign origin” so what exactly is the etymology to this word? How is that there are no etymological breakdowns absolutely conclusive for this word Ar especially when it connects to other words as we have shown with Aroer above?

Then we have the name Arba which simply seems like a play on words because the name Kirjath means a city in the Hebrew and one of the cities taken by Joshua’s troops was Kirjath-arba (the city of Arba) which is the same name as Arbah in Gen. 35:27 which in fact is Hebron which means that originally, this was the possession of the Moors before Joshua’s troops ran them from here.

 

Notice that the second definitions lists Ar’ba as meaning “hero-baal”. Is this the true root of the word Arab? So many ways we can dissect the past several definitions but for now, we will move on.

What is interesting to note is that phonetically, this name Arba, appears to be a play on the name Arab which, appears to be a play on the name Rabbah, the very name of the city of Moab! Arba, Arab, Rabba, all appear to be the same exact word semantically jumbled up by the codex writers having no stable definitions that one can point to definitively because when you get to the bottom of the Rabbah at image, the 2^nd definition reveals that the city Ar was also called Rabbath Moab and then at number 3, it says it is a “city of Judah”.

So here we see a coalescence with Moab and Ammon, the ancient people of the land falsely given a condemnable slander by those who changed the texts of the Torah to read that somehow Lot, a righteous man could be tricked by his own two daughters to drink excessively on back to back nights and have sex with them and produce two sons, Moab and Ammon (Ben-Ami), all because there was NO MAN IN ALL OF THE EARTH THAT WOULD GO IN UNTO THEM (Gen. 19:31). Ammon is the exact same as Amon or Amen, one of the God’s of Egypt.

It is possible, it is quite possible and plausible that, Amen-Ra (Ammon and Ar) represents two branches of our race that came together to form one nation during our rule in Egypt and in some later date, when pushed out, formed ourselves another kingdom in North Arabia or, always maintained a kingdom in these parts of Arabia and from here, went and formed the Egyptian civilization and the many others we have in Africa even until this day. Prophet Noble Drew Ali informs us in Moorish Holy Koran that the sons of Canaan who were driven out of the Holy Lands “received permission from the Pharoahs of Egypt to settle in that portion of Egypt. In later years they formed themselves kingdoms. These kingdoms are called this day Morocco, Algiers, Tunis, Tripoli, etc.”

Remember, ancient writers list the people Ar as existing coevally with the Egyptians and the Ethiopians and so this is hardly something that can be dismissed as conflation. Of course, more research would have to be done in this regard but the parallel, the parallel astounds even if you want to in this instance, accuse the author of conflation. I will answer up to the charge with a bevy of research!

Now here is where it gets EVEN MORE interesting. In the below scanned image, we see that Rabbath is of the children of Ammon. Underneath we see Rabbi and after we see Rabbith meaning multitude.

Now we have Rabbath, the same exact as Rabbah, which connects to form the city Rabbath-Moab and this author believes he has cracked one of the vital codes pertaining to our history as is scripted in the bible and that is, a continuation of Hamite (Ammon) and Cushite (Ra) who are undoubtedly the ancient Moors. Dunjee Houston in her seminal works states that Amen-Ra is in fact Cush.[24]

It is this authors view that, these places do not represent the area known as Palestine proper today, no, it is this authors opinion based on intense research and perusal of various sources and cross referencing professional scholars like Dr. Wesley Muhammad, sister Dana Marniche, Africanist and linguist Bernard Leeman, Kamal Salibi who wrote The Bible Came From Arabia, and several other early works, this author is convinced that most if not all of what is happening in the Old Testament narrative, is in fact taking place deep in Arabia and not where we believe Israel to be today.

Notice where Leeman’s map puts Israel and Judah. Notice the name Jeddah also. Notice on the map “Old Jerusalem” as being a part of this area whose real appellation would have been Rabbath or Rabba/Rabba or Arba/Arab with Judah being Jeddah, a city of Rabba. Notice that, according to this map, where New Jerusalem is situated, where Palestine proper is located today.

Look at the image below giving the definition for Amon. Notice the first Amon is connected Judah. This cannot be a coincidence, this is a skilled way of hiding the truth of a people conquered largely by this book and its weilders, and secondly, by a people who knew we would not look close enough. This is why this author moves with Prophet Noble Drew Ali who brought the indisputable facts.

 

It is clear that Ammon relates to Amen-Ra of which this author boldly asserts is the connection of two branches of our ancestry because the very name Amen-Ra is a connection of two Gods of ancient Egypt, Amun (the hidden one) and Re (the sun) and was the king of Gods in his human form. In the Hebrew, this epithet would be rendered Malek-Elohim. Malek means king and the God of the Ammonites is Moloch which is nothing more than a slick play on the word Malek, which in fact means king. Put two and two together for those of you who come across this missive. They demonized your ancestry and its Gods.

Remember, Abraham also means “father of the multitude” and we see for Amon above, the same meaning giving. Are these in any way connected? Look at the word Abraham. If the M is removed, it would give us ABRAHA which seems to fit in with this researchers theory relating the words Rabba, Rabbah, Rabbath, Arba, and Arab. Again, take the M off of Abraha(m) and look at again. Again, this is this researchers theory that appears on its face, as appearing to having a connection.

In the above we clearly see that Ham is also called Jupiter Ammon, the same called for Cush and we simply see that Cush and Ham, and Moab and Ammon and Canaan and the tribes connecting to them called “sons” in the biblical eponymous narratives are all related, and, in fact, are all one.

Drawing off of the works of Corippus, an epic poem written by him called Johannis, in hexameters of eight books containing 4700 lines, he details the wars between the Moors and the Byzantine empire during the years of 534-538 A.D. Flavius Cresconius Corippus began writing these epics in the 550’s and the wars are styled in a way as a form of “Holy wars” by the literary analysis of the texts.[25] This was obviously before the advent of the Mohammedan religion.

In this works, the pagan Moors, those who were not converts to Christianity, are subject to the usual Christian attacks; they adore idols devoid of meaning and put their trust in “false gods”, who are called Ammon and Gurzil (2.111-12). Gurzil was a war deity of the ancient Berbers of North Africa fashioned in the form of a bull who is identified with the Egyptian Amun which the same as Ammon. This same idol was taken into battles by the Moabitess queen Dhiya (Kahina) into battles with the forces of Islam.

The accounts recall the pagan priest and Moorish chief Ierna who flees on horseback, carrying off a heavy statue of his god Gurzil. Far from saving him, the burdensome idol slows him down and he is caught and killed (4.1137-63). This is meant to prove that the faith of the Moors in the power of these gods and in the effectiveness of their rites imposes a lack of understanding that leads them to their ruin. The poem also gives a description of the Moors consulting the oracles at the sanctuary of Ammon.[26]

The historian will note in the above, the pre-wars between Christianity and these Moors, whom the Christians wrote in their own works as Moabites in conflict before the time of Prophet Mohammed. The Moslem will note what salvation Islam must have brought to a people who put their faith in stone images as opposed to the almighty unseen Allah. Under Islam, these Moors would go back and take Spain in 711 A.D. and most of Europe, thus proving the power of Allah was greater than the power of the Christian god and that power placed in stone idols that voodoo worshipers today still adore. This researcher however, wants to point out the fact that these Moors in North Africa, whose own traditions, from the Berber tribes, to the peoples of Yoruba land on the Southwest coasts of Africa, all have a tradition that has been passed down that they came from ancient Canaan and inhabited those parts of Africa. Arabia has in fact been identified with ancient Canaan, not just in the doctrine of the M.S.T of A., but by accredited scholars as well.[27]

In early research recorded in 16^th – 17^th century works, we get yet another connection linking Moab, the Ammonites, the Sabians, the Chaldeans, and the Canaanites, the sun or Ra and even the ancient high priest Melchizedek.

“…as the Baal-peor of the Moabites, the Baal, or Moloch, of the Ammonites; the title signifies lord with all people, who are those particularly that are said to have passed their seed thro’ fire, and meant thereby the sun, whose heat being , as it were, the life of all things, they accounted the heat of fire to be sacred; which must have been one of the first doctrine of the Sabians in Chaldea, by whom we have said, this error was first broached, and communicated, by degrees, to the nations round about. This appears by what we read of Abraham, who left his country on the other side of the Euphrates, for the idolatries of the land; and, to avoid them, came into the land of Canaan, where he found the sentiments and practices of men more conformable to religion, and the duties we owe to God; for Melchisedek was then alive in Canaan, and stiled the priest of the Most High God; and the people where were, for the most part, in a state of purity in matters of religion, as all the nations about must also have been…Nothing then is plainer, than that the religion of the Moabites, Ammonites, Midianites, Edomites, Amalekites, Cananites and Philistines, was only the old Sabian religion of the Chaldees.”[28] [bold, italicized and underlined emphasis mines]

We have conclusively shown in the latter that, Ammon is in fact related to the Moors, who are in fact the Moabites, biblically brothers, but historically the same people. And here, we locate the ancient people of Ar, resisting attacks and conversion of Christian forces based on a war that has been raging with the same groups for millennia, all based on someone writing “cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren” as shown cited in the Babylonian Talmud above, and Moab, being cursed “forever” all because they did not give the army of Israel bread and water (Deut. 23:3-4). This is the propaganda of the scriptures that must be corrected or else we are doomed to repeat the lies of men and teach this to our children.

So we conclude, Nar (naar) is in fact Moor, the illuminated ones (nwr) (owr), the Lords (mor in Aramaic lexicon 12399 as MoReA and 12400 MoReH[29]), the light of the world, those whose bare skin, their hides, are a badge, made to be a dark curse by some cruel god full of human emotions which in the light of aught, is undoubted written by the pernicious hands of some men seeking to make whole portions of humanity second class citizens in the nation under the rulership of God, Allah. Could you, who have read this, imagine what would have happened to us had not Islam come? When Islam became corrupted through ahadith and Uthman’s own version of the Koran (see the Hafsa codex) which is what we erroneously accept today as the first and only version of the Koran of Mohammed, could you imagine where we would be if Prophet Noble Drew Ali did come to us?

We will end this exposition with this. Earlier in this exposition, we cited "aleph vav resh" which produces the sound RUT. What is ironic about this is that, the name Ruth that we have for Ruth the Moabitess, is in fact pronounced Rut. While the two sequences in the Hebrew are different, both appear to produce the same word. The –th that we have today is a suffix from Germanic origins. The online etymological dictionary has for this suffix:

 th (2) 

suffix forming nouns of action, state, or quality from verbs or adjectives (e.g. depth, strength, truth), from Old English -ðu, -ð, from Proto-Germanic *-itho (cf. Old Norse -þ, Old High German -ida, Gothic -iþa), abstract noun suffix, from PIE *-ita (cf. Sanskrit -tati-; Greek -tet-; Latin -tati-, as in libertatem "liberty" from liber"free"). Sometimes in English reduced to -t, especially after -h- (e.g. height).

 Mirriam Webster’s online dictionary has for a definition of ruth that says:

ruth noun \ˈrüth\
Definition of RUTH1:  compassion for the misery of another
2:  sorrow for one's own faults :  remorse Examples of RUTH1.      <listening to your flippant comments about the homeless, I wonder if you have any ruth>
2.      Origin of RUTHMiddle English ruthe, from ruen to rueFirst Known Use: 13th century Related to RUTH Synonymsbigheartedness, charity, commiseration, compassion,feeling, good-heartedness, humanity, kindheartedness,kindliness, kindness, largeheartedness, mercy, pity, heart,softheartedness, sympathy, warmheartedness[30]

So in the Germanic to English speaking dialects, RUT becomes RUTH. An analysis of this can be found in several spoken languages the world over where Ruth is pronounced Rut in some form or variation and even in the English, with the t or –th at all.

• Hirut (Amharic)
• Rue (English)
• Rufa (Russian)
• Rút (Irish Gaelic)
• Rút (Czech)
• Rut (German), (Italian), (Maltese), (Spanish),(Swedish), (Afrikaans)
• Rūta (Lithuanian)
• Ruta (Polish)
• Rute (Portuguese)
• Ruut (Finnish and Estonian)

What is interesting to note here is that the double lion in Egypt is referred to as Ruti. Gerald Massey gives an excellent breakdown of this figure in his A Book of the Beginnings, Volume 2 (pg. 505). Naomi (who is directly connected to Ruth) has two sons who eventually perish from sickness. Prophet Noble Drew Ali informs us that the Prophet Jesus is from the tribe of Canaanites and Moabites and the inhabitants of Africa (Ch. 46. v. 2).

Ruth is the matriarchal grandmother of Prophet Jesus who was born in Judah, of Bethlehem, in the house of David. In the book of Ruth, Ruth is cited as saying Ruth:

 “Moreover, may your house be like the house of Perez whom Tamar bore to Judah…” (4:12)

Strong’s Concordance has:

6557 Perets peh'-rets the same as 6556; Perets, the name of two Israelites:--Perez, Pharez.

Again, the connection to Moab and Judah is made, although hidden in plain site by the biblical codex writers. This researcher also believes that the name Perez/Pharez is an allusion to the ancient Canaanite tribe called the Perizzites , one of the oldest tribes of ancient Canaan whose name is said to mean “villagers” or “dwellers in the open country” but we debunked that myth earlier because this is precisely what the Hebrew word ‘erets defines unless, ‘erets is actually perets as shown in Strong’s 6557 above where the (‘) represents as phoneme for the letter ‘P’. I will not touch on that at this point and will now conclude this treatise.

So it is settled, according to this researcher at least, that Nar does in fact mean Moor and that they are not two distinct designations, but are one and the same as has been convincingly constructed in the above. Nar is Moor. Also, this writer wanted to show the connection between the Moabites and the Israelites as to say that because there was a war between two fractions of our same people (Moors) that happened thousands of years ago, and scripted in the bible in a way where the Europeans have placed themselves in the place of the Israelites, and have been waging war against us ever since, that my brothers who identify as Hebrew Israelites, do not fall for that trap and look a little bit deeper into the scriptures and the history of our people and you will see that they are one and the same, as opposed to fighting us over someone elses misrepresentations of our history. The 5 Germanic tribes warred with each other incessantly for a time; do you say them dismissing and warring with each other today? We are one people; search your heart for the answers.

Peace and Love

Sheik Way-El, Grand Sheik and Divine Minister

Moorish Science Temple of America

Subordinate Temple Atlantis

Georgia, U.S.A.

---

[1] “The Devil's Lane: Sex and Race in the Early South” edited by Catherine Clinton, Michele Gillespie (New York London Oxford University Press 1997) ISBN-10: 0195112431

[2] The Philanthropist: Or, Repository for Hints and Suggestions, Calculated to promote the comfort and happiness of man, Volume 2 (1812) By, pg. 156, printed by Richard Taylor and Company

[3] Wollof - English Dictionary prepared by Peace Corps The Gambia PO Box 582 Banjul The Gambia tel: 220 392120

1995 http://resourcepage.gambia.dk/ftp/wollof.pdf

[4] http://www.peshitta.org/

[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alveolar_nasal

[6] Edenics, Interchangeable Letters

http://www.edenics.org/explore/articles/interchangeable-letters/

[7] Word List for Wolof - UCLA Phonetics Lab Archive http://archive.phonetics.ucla.edu/Language/WOL/wol_word-list_1981_01.html

[8] Wollof - English Dictionary, pg. 1

[9] The Ancient Egyptian Language: An Historical Study By James P. Allen (2013), pg. 2

[10] A Book of the Beginnings, Volume 2 By Gerald Massey (republished 2007) pp. 71, 75, 203, 294, 409

[11] ETHIOPIA MEANS "SOMETHING DIVIDED" PROOF FROM THE ANCIENTS WHO COINED THE TERM. WE ARE NOT A BLACK PEOPLE. By Sheik Way El (2011) https://www.facebook.com/notes/abba-lord/ethiopia-means-something-divided-proof-from-the-ancients-who-coined-the-term-we-/10150386314854763

[12] The Moorish, who were ancient Moabites, and the founders of the Holy City of Mecca” Connecting the critical dots http://lordabba.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-moorish-who-were-ancient-moabites.html

[13] THE MOABITES WHO ARE THE MOORS. HISTORICAL PROOF OF OUR LINEAGE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=488bJNmcF7Y

[14] The Medieval state: essays presented to James Campbell By John Robert Maddicott, David Michael Palliser, James Campbell (2000) pg. 159

[15] STRONGS NT 286: ἀμνός http://biblehub.com/greek/286.htm

[16] http://greekconcordance.blogspot.com/2008/03/lamb.html

[17] HOLY KORAN OF THE MOORISH SCIENCE TEMPLE OF AMERICA, CH. 46. V 2

[18] http://greekconcordance.blogspot.com/2008/03/lamb.html

[19] ‘Er’ 6147 from 5782 ‘ur’ , Ar 6144 ‘ir’, ‘ar’, ‘ayar 5892 also connected to ‘Ai’ in 5892, Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible: Updated and Expanded Edition 2007 Hendrickson Publishing, ISBN 978-1-59856-378-8

[20] From Babylon to Timbuktu: A History of Ancient Black Races Including the Black Hebrews By Rudolph R. Windsor (2011, Author House, first published in 1969), pg. 28

[21]  The Babylonian Talmud translated by Translated by MICHAEL L. RODKINSON (1918) Volumes 1-10

[22] The new encyclopædia; or, Universal dictionary of arts and sciences By Encyclopaedia Perthensis, New encyclopaedia, pg. 639

[23] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begadkefat

[24] “The Pharaohs claimed to be literal and lineally descended from Amen-Ra. This was implicitly believed by their subjects. Let us seek to trace who Amen-Ra was. He was originally the god of Ethiopia. Amen-Ra was Cush, the son of Ham from whom the Cushites sprang. He was not one of the oldest deities of Egypt because he was preceeded by the gods of the ages of Noah (Saturn) and Ham. About the time of the rise of Thebes his name from his worldwide conquests must have been entered into the cycle of gods; for Africans deified their dead kings. Undoubtedly descendants of the great Cush sat upon the throne of Egypt This is why his name and form appear in the 11th Dynasty and its line of kings assumed his name.” Houston, Druscilla Dunjee, Wonderful Ethiopians of the Ancient Cushite Empire, (1926) pg. 77

[25] Religious Diversity in Late Antiquity, edited by David Morton Gwynn, Susanne Bangert (2010) pg. 486

[26] Ibid, pg. 487

[27] See Ifá and Islām as Sibling Rivals: The Black Arabian Origins of the Yoruba November 4, 2013 © Copyright 2013 An excerpt from: Aḷḷāh and Olódùmarè: Islām and Ifá as Sibling Rivals (forthcoming) By Wesley Muhammad, PhD

[28] An Universal history, from the earliest account of time, Volume 4 By George Sale, George Psalmanazar, Archibald Bower, George Shelvocke, John Campbell, John Swinton, (1747) pg. 555

[29] http://www.peshitta.org/

[30] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ruth