The translation you were given is not accurate. This is one word, not two words. There’s a letter missing because it’s not in the English language.
Meen, doesn’t mean “falsehood, lie and untruth.” it’s meaningless if it wasn’t part of another word. Like “HIM” in Hebrew. ELO-HIM, for example. It refers to the plural of the word it’s attached to it.
Therefore, “ALKAH’MEEN” correct translation is القائمين
Another way of saying it in English is… “The Watchers”.
Double check with someone who speaks Arabic as a first language or learned Arabic from a reliable source.
Show that person my translation and double check, if you wish.
If you’ll assume they’re two words, your friend’s translation would be too much of a stretch to get the final translation he/she understood. That’s how they translated it :
ALKAH, one word , meaning “I will meet him” or to be more exact “meet him”.
MEEN, one word, meaning “Who”.
Problem with this translation, is the second word. MEEN. It means “Who” in a very specific Arabaic accent. Modern accent. While ALKAH is traditional Arabic from the ancient original language. The two words if spoken that way, would be very funny if you said it to anyone who knows Arabic. Almost a joke.
If you translate it as one word “ALKAH’MEEN القائمين” it makes more sense and the meaning is more clear and my conclusion is that it’s the accurate translation. Another interesting thing is that for this word to mean “The Watchers” that would be according to very ancient way of using Arabic, the very original Arabic that was used hundreds of years ago. You will only find such meaning in ancient manuscripts. That’s why it makes more sense to me, that it was said by a spirit. Only spirits would use that meaning today.
Translating a word from a language, written in a different language, is not an easy task. To get it right, sometimes you need different opinions, understand the context, stc I once received a word similar to this one from a spirit, and at that time it made no sense to me whatsoever. Years later, I found a book, the title of that book was that exact word “The Kybalion”. So I can imagine how it maybe confusing for you. Especially when you don’t know this language.
My suggestion, if you wish to get the best translation, is to check and examine all possible variations and opinions. Then accept what makes more sense you.
It’s my belief that all the spirits and gods we encounter are no more than aspects of our subconscious. If you believe that Gandhi was a spiritually developed individual, it wouldn’t be a stretch to encounter him as an ascended master.
As with the Tibetan practice of Tulpas, the more attention you give to an idea the higher likelihood it has of manifesting, especially on casual planes where the distinction between what is in your mind and is not in your mind is blurred.
Thats why I refuse to name any gods I work with in my stories. People see the names and can’t go any further then what they already know. My own understanding has change and will continue to change in the future.
agree. You are going to the root. But in that case we are all nothing but a projection of the conscious.
Krishna is nothing but Atman ((soul))…The soul is everything. Going to the root, the whole material cosmic manifestation is nothing but the projection of the brahman ((( brahman= highest conscious)))…Thats not god but godly.
I know this is an old post but I wanted to say thank you for sharing. I understand that Gandhi the man was an a-hole… But I agree with what you’re saying about the ascended masters. I feel like this thread could have evolved into a really good discussion. It’s just too bad that so many got caught up on an image that was projected to you.
.