The Children of Israel Did Not Live in Palestine, but in Yemen

He said in it: Israel distorted and falsified the heavenly books and history, and that the children of Israel did not live in the land of Palestine and elsewhere, but rather they lived in Yemen. He cited some historical evidence (not our topic) and cited a Quranic verse: {So he stayed not long, and said, “I have encompassed that which you have not encompassed, and I have come to you from Sheba with certain news.”} An-Naml 22. The important thing is why I put this topic in this section, because this historian cited that verse: {So he stayed not long, and said, “I have encompassed that which you have not encompassed, and I have come to you from Sheba with certain news.”} AnNaml 22. We will explain why he cited it as evidence of the validity of his statement and the response to His false claim: This historian said that the following is evidence that the Children of Israel did not live in Palestine but in Yemen : It is stated in the Holy Quran: {So he stayed not far away. He said, ” I have encompassed that which you have not encompassed. I have come to you from Sheba with sure news.”} An-Naml 22. This happened when the hoopoe went to Yemen. The Quran said about him that he “stayed not far away.” That is, the distance was not great between the land of Solomon’s kingdom and the land of Yemen. Therefore, Solomon and the Children of Israel lived near Yemen and perhaps they lived in the same place. He also said: The hoopoe did not use Solomon’s special wind because he went out without his permission. Therefore, the distance is very short. The response first: The Almighty’s saying (so he stayed not far away) indicates time, not distance. The evidence is: Tafsir Al-Jalalayn (so he stayed) with a damma on the kaf and a fatha on it (not far away) a short time. Tafsir Al-Muyassar. So the hoopoe stayed a short time. Tafsir Al-Baydawi

• so he stayed not far away *a short time Long

interpretation of Ibn Kathir

{The hoopoe stayed} {not far away} meaning:he was absent for a short time

Al-Qurtubi’s interpretation of

the Almighty’s saying: {The hoopoe stayed not far away} meaning. The majority of the reciters are on the damma of the kaf, and Asim alone read it with the fatha. Its meaning in both readings is he stayed. Sibawayh said: Makta yamkutha mukuthan just as they said qadda yaqud qudun. He said: And makta is like an adverb. Someone else said: The fatha is better because of the Almighty’s saying: {remaining} [Al-Kahf: 3] since it is from makta; it is said: makta yamkutha, so he is makith; and makta yamkutha like athma ya’zim, so he is mukith; like athim; and makta yamkutha, so he is makith; like hamd yahmidh, so he is hamid. The pronoun in {makta} may refer to Solomon; the meaning is: Solomon remained after the inspection and the threat for a short time, meaning not a long time. It is possible that it refers to the hoopoe, and this is the most common

interpretation of Al-Baghawi.

{Famakatha} with the opening of the kaf, and others read it with the closing of it, and these are two dialects, {Ghayrā Ba’īd}meaning: not long.

So the correct thing is that the word “makatha” was an expression of a period of time and not a distance.

Second: - The period in which the hoopoe stayed not far is not from his departure to his return, but from Solomon’s words to the hoopoe’s return

. Tafsir al-Tabari

(So he stayed not far) So Solomon did not stay long from the time he asked about the hoopoe, until the hoopoe came.

This is the most correct and sound opinion .

Therefore, we have proven two topics:

1 - The word “makatha” not far: expresses time, not place.

2 - The word “makatha” meant the period from Solomon’s words to the hoopoe’s return, not from the hoopoe’s departure to his return.

🤍