what is the meaning of name or the title dhul-qarnain--"Lord of the two Qarns" ? "Qarns may mean: (1) a horn in a literal sense,as in the case of a ram or bull ; (2) a horn in a methaphorical sense, as in English,the horn of a crescent, or by further metaphor (not in English language), the horn of a kingdom or territory,two portion of opposite end ; (3) by another metaphor, a summit, a lock of hair, typifying strength, a crest such as eastern kings wear on their diadems; (4) reffering to time,an epoch, an age, a generation, meaning (1) is inapplicable to a man or a great King. The other meanings may be applicable implying: (2) lord of the east and the west,lord of wide territory or two kingdoms; (3) lord of two crests on his diadem,typifying two kingdoms, or a rank superior to that of an ordinary king; (4) lord of more than one epoch:one whose power and influence extend far beyond his life time.
if we accept the popular identification of dhul-qarnain with Alexander,all three latter designation would be applicable to him,as he was lord of the west and the east, lord of the Greek states united for the first time (Hellenic captain general) and of the widely extended Persian dominion which included all western Asia,Egypt,central Asia,Afghanistan, and the Punjab(at least portions). He is represented on his coins with two horn on his head: he considered himself as son of Jupiter Ammon (who had the two horns of a ram),with a devine mission . He revolutionised the history of Asia, Europe, and Africa(Egypt),and his influence lasted many generation after his death at the young age of 33. He lived from B.C. 356 to 323, but his name was one to conjure with for many centuries after him. Though his conquest Greek art gave the impulse to Gandhara art in central Asia and north west India. The city of Alexandria which he founded in Egypt became the cultural centre, not only for Greece and Rome, but for Judaism and Christianity, and retain its supremacy till the sixth century of the Christian era. Justinian closed its school of philosophy in 529. Its philosophic and scientific schools spread their influence over even a wider area than the Mediterranean basin.
Now the generality of the world of Islam have accepted Alexander the great as the one meant by the epithet dhul-qarnain. But some of our 'Ulama have raised doubt about it and made other suggestions. one is that it was not the Macedonian Alexander the great,but an earlier prehistoric king contemporary with Abraham; because, they say, dhul-qarnain was a man of faith (vs,88,98) while Alexander the great was a pagan and believed in Grecian gods. An identification with a supposed prehistoric king, about whom nothing is known, is no identification at all. on the other hand, all that is known about Alexander the great shows that he was a man of lofty ideas. He died over three centuries before the time of Jesus, but that does not mean they he was not a man of faith, for God revealed Himself to men of all nations in all ages. Alexander was a disciples of the philosopher Aristotle, noted for his pursuit of sound Truth in all departments of thought. Alexander's reference to Jupiter Ammon may have been no more than a playful reference to the superstitions of his time. Socrates spoke of the Gracian gods, and so did Aristotle and Plato; but it would be wrong to call them idolaters or men without faith. In Ethiopic traditional stories of Alexander the great, he is represented as a great prophet.
Another suggestion made is that Dhul-qarnain was an ancient king of Persia. A king of Persia is referred to as a Ram with two horns in the book of Daniel (viii, 3) in the old testament. But in the same book ,the Ram with two horn was smitten, cast down to the ground, and stamped upon by a he goat with two horns(viii.7-. There is nothing in our literature to suggest that dhul-qarnain came to such ignominious end. Nor is the book of Daniel an authority worth consideration. Its authenticity is very doubtful. There is no question that it is a patch work, as part of it are in the Aramaic (or Chaldee) language and parts in Hebrew, and there are in it a number of Greek words. The Septuagint version contained large additions. 'Daniel " --whoever the writer or writers were -- refers to historical Persian kings. If it is argued that it was some prehistoric Persian king who built the Iron Gates(vs 96) to keep out Gog and Magog tribes(vs 94),this is no identification at all. There is no unanimity about the identity of the Iron Wall, or the Gog and Magog tribes. Both these subjects will be referred to presently.
Another suggestion made is that it was some old prehistoric Himyarite king from Yemen, about whom nothing was known. This, again, is no identification at all.
The question of Yajuj and majuj (Gog and Magog) and the iron Barrier built to keep them out is some interest. It is practically agreed that they were wild tribes of central Asia which have made inroads on settled kingdoms and Empires at various stage of the world's history. The Chinese Empire suffered from their incursions and built the Great wall of China to keep out the Manchus and mangols. The Persian suffered from them at various times and various points. Their incursions into Europe in large hordes caused migrations and displacement of population on an enormous scale, and eventually broke up the Romans as "Scythians", but that term does not help us very much, either ethnically or geographically.
TO PART 2

Op, no offense intended ooo, but the truth has to be clarified.

You see, Dhul Qarnayn that was mentioned in the Quran is an Imam of Tawheed (Islamic monotheism), he's not the greek/roman Alexandra because the later was a pagan.

You don't need to bother yourself with the stress of reconciling between the two figures. This types of desperate attempts at reconciling two similar but clearly contrasting figures will lead to errors.

# You said Alexandra called himself son of Jupiter. Maybe you don't know the implication of this statement. It's like someone today saying he's son of Sango, Ogun etc and you wave it off as mere superstition of his time. As ignorant as a lot of the Muslim world is today, even the laymen can't say such crap let alone an erudite.
Like I said earlier, Dhul Qarnayn is an Imam of Tawheed.

Then you called him a student of Aristotle and described Aristotle as one who sought for truth.

# Aristotle whose teachings -directly and indirectly- has destroyed the creed of many Muslim scholars who went into philosophy. The Islamic till today world is not free of the toxins the disciples of that man released.
The deviant sects like the mu'tazilah, jahmiyyah, ashaa'irah, maaturidiyyah etc are a result of this man's viruses.

And you affiliate an Imam of Tawheed to him, not just an ordinary affiliation but teacher-student affiliation.

It appears to me that you don't know the implications of this submission of yours. What I've stated is just a tip of the iceberg, anyone who wants to have a deep understanding should see Imam Ibn Katheer's bidayah wa nihayah.

I hope this my comment benefits us all.

Actually I appreciate ur contribution, but if he wasn't him then who was dhul-qarnain or did he just exist in theoretical state ?
and before you conclude,why can't u just read the part 2 I posted.

The OP is Abdullah Yusuf Ali's theory on Dhul-Qurnayn. You can find this in his English and commentary of the Quran, sura al-Khaf. No doubt it is an attempt of research to the identity of this great servant of Allah, Dhul-Qurnayn. Abdullah Yusuf Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), his commentary of the Quran is usually based on western theory, christian and Jewish theological beliefs and comparison. He hardly treat Quran and its subjects using Islamic traditions.

ATHAR ON DHUL-QURNAYN
Imam al-Tabari (d. 310):

Muḥammad b. al-Muthannā – Muḥammad b. Ja’far – Shu’bah – al-Qāsim b. Abī Bazzah – Abū al-Ṭufayl:
I heard ‘Alī while they asked him about Dhū al-Qarnayn: “Was he a prophet?” He replied, “He was a righteous servant. He loved Allāh and Allāh loved him. He sought the guidance of Allāh and He guided him. Then, Allāh SENT him to his people. But, they struck him twice on his head. As a result, he was named Dhū al-Qarnayn. And among you TODAY is an example of him.

* Concerning this athar, Prof. Ibn Yāsīn states: Its chain is ṣaḥīḥ

Source: Jāmi al-Bayān fī Tāwīl al-Qur’ān (Dār al-Fikr; 1415 H) [annotator: Ṣidqī Jamīl al-‘Aṭṭār], vol. 16, pp. 12-13

* Prof. Dr. Ḥikmat b. Bashīr b. Yāsīn, Mawsū’at al-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Masbūr min al-Tafsīr bi al-Māthūr (Madīnah: Dār al-Māthar li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzī’ wa al-Ṭabā’at; 1st edition, 1420 H), vol. 3, p. 322

Lastly, I believe the above athar is enough on Dhul-Qurnayn than looking for his western equivalent which is very controversial and never match the Quranic description of him. Just like the As'habul Khaf (companions of the cave), only Allah knows their true identities. He, the Most High, only wants us to learn about their piety, steadfastness, submission, struggle etc not exactly who they were in western history. Same is for Dhul Qurnayn.

AlBaqir:
The OP is Abdullah Yusuf Ali's theory on Dhul-Qurnayn. You can find this in his English and commentary of the Quran, sura al-Khaf. No doubt it is an attempt of research to the identity of this great servant of Allah, Dhul-Qurnayn. Abdullah Yusuf Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), his commentary of the Quran is usually based on western theory, christian and Jewish theological beliefs and comparison. He hardly treat Quran and its subjects using Islamic traditions.

ATHAR ON DHUL-QURNAYN
Imam al-Tabari (d. 310):

Muḥammad b. al-Muthannā – Muḥammad b. Ja’far – Shu’bah – al-Qāsim b. Abī Bazzah – Abū al-Ṭufayl:
I heard ‘Alī while they asked him about Dhū al-Qarnayn: “Was he a prophet?” He replied, “He was a righteous servant. He loved Allāh and Allāh loved him. He sought the guidance of Allāh and He guided him. Then, Allāh SENT him to his people. But, they struck him twice on his head. As a result, he was named Dhū al-Qarnayn. And among you TODAY is an example of him.

* Concerning this athar, Prof. Ibn Yāsīn states: Its chain is ṣaḥīḥ

Source: Jāmi al-Bayān fī Tāwīl al-Qur’ān (Dār al-Fikr; 1415 H) [annotator: Ṣidqī Jamīl al-‘Aṭṭār], vol. 16, pp. 12-13

* Prof. Dr. Ḥikmat b. Bashīr b. Yāsīn, Mawsū’at al-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Masbūr min al-Tafsīr bi al-Māthūr (Madīnah: Dār al-Māthar li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzī’ wa al-Ṭabā’at; 1st edition, 1420 H), vol. 3, p. 322

Lastly, I believe the above athar is enough on Dhul-Qurnayn than looking for his western equivalent which is very controversial and never match the Quranic description of him. Just like the As'habul Khaf (companions of the cave), only Allah knows their true identities. He, the Most High, only wants us to learn about their piety, steadfastness, submission, struggle etc not exactly who they were in western history. Same is for Dhul Qurnayn.

Oga, those are books of the people of sunnah you are quoting.
These double standards are the primary characteristics of misguided innovators.

But when these books expose your shia evils you and your shia people will say they are unreliable because they were compiled by ordinary mortals.

Olodo people, it's the angels that compiled the Quran abi?!

I ask Allah to make you repent before Death catches up with you.

laidima88:
Actually I appreciate ur contribution, but if he wasn't him then who was dhul-qarnain or did he just exist in theoretical state ?
and before you conclude,why can't u just read the part 2 I posted.

The fact that the Quran mentions him suffices to prove to us that he existed even if we don't find any evidence for his existence through our research. That's what is called true eeman as Allah says describing the believers:

Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 3:
الَّذِينَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِالْغَيْبِ وَيُقِيمُونَ الصَّلَاةَ وَمِمَّا رَزَقْنَاهُمْ يُنفِقُونَ

Who believe in the Unseen, and establish worship, and spend of that We have bestowed upon them;
(English - Pickthal)

via iQuran

And the statement of Allah is Everly true:

Surah Al-Anaam, Verse 115:
وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَتُ رَبِّكَ صِدْقًا وَعَدْلًا لَّا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ

Perfected is the Word of thy Lord in truth and justice. There is naught that can change His words. He is the Hearer, the Knower.
(English - Pickthal)

via iQuran

And perfect knowledge lies with Allah alone.

The Quran and the hadith encourage us to seek knowledge and doing research is also a form of knowledge seeking.

Those to whom we have given the book(the quran) study it as it should be studied: they are the one that believe therein: those who reject faith therein the loss is their own.(Quran, 2:121)

and also the hadith "seeking knowledge is incumbent upon every Muslim" (Ibn Majah 1/224 and tirmidhi)

from the above, it is manifest that making enquiry about what is vague or cryptic is valid in islam.

laidima88:
The Quran and the hadith encourage us to seek knowledge and doing research is also a form of knowledge seeking.

Those to whom we have given the book(the quran) study it as it should be studied: they are the one that believe therein: those who reject faith therein the loss is their own.(Quran, 2:121)

and also the hadith "seeking knowledge is incumbent upon every Muslim" (Ibn Majah 1/224 and tirmidhi)

from the above, it is manifest that making enquiry about what is vague or cryptic is valid in islam.

Beneficial knowledge..... Of what benefit is this research about? not only is this of no benefit but the whole theory doesnt match with islam...

If something of this nature doesn't match, I don't think non will till the descendant of prophet Isa( asw).

secondly we all know the authenticity of the Quran is of no doubt, all we are trying to do is to ascertain it to the world so your coupled eeman claim is obsolete.