The Dao Bums
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won



About Apech

  • Rank
    effortlessly annoying cat

Recent Profile Visitors

31,854 profile views
  1. Let things be

    Just sharing this cos i like it . Especially this part 'So therefore, if you let it be, in fact, the things we want the most actually come.' Sounds quite Daoist for a Buddhist
  2. Which books sit on your nightstand?

  3. Indeed and it gets worse they used galena as well:
  4. I once went into Starbucks and asked for a tall, white Americano - and Robert Mitchum walked out from behind the counter. Would you believe it?
  5. Not much because they are as you point out not very Egyptian and possibly Sumerian - the circular space between the necks is where the malachite was ground and mixed to make eye make up. Green was the colour of health, wholeness and soundness - so green eye make-up was good. I had to look up 'huaraches' - I'd never heard of them There's another fringe theory about the ankh - that is a cross section of a bovine vertebrae.
  6. The ankh = sandal or sandal straps is a well attested Egyptological idea. In fact Gardener and others use it but with rather tenuous justification. One origin is the Palette of Narmer which pruports to show the king unifying the two lands (North and South Egypt) as below: Behind the king is an attendant holding the king's sandals. On one side he wears the crown of the North and on the other the crown of the south. I believe this was found by Petrie at Herankonopolis. One of the ancient capitals called Nekhen by the Egyptians. I've seen a replica in the Ashmolean and it to my eye is far from convincing and far too convenient that such an object should be found - and the name of the king Narmer does not correspond to the king list name of Menes as the first dynastic pharaoh. It certainly shows a king conquering various areas but it could be one of many pre-dynastic pretenders in my view. The ankh means 'life' and bears only a passing resemblance to a sandal strap - its use in iconography is of a 'life force' which can be distributed from gods to men (and women) by gods in a form of libation - it flows over them. The was scepter is usually thought of a symbol of Set (Sutekh) because its head resembles the Set beast - which is an unidentified animal with a long nose and long (usually square tipped) ears - rather like an okapi or ant-eater in appearance. In early Egypt Set was not seen as evil but as equal and opposite to Horus as the god of kingship. One pharaoh at least used both gods , Per-Ibsen:
  7. Hard to believe it's almost a year. Still missing Jim's presence everyday, he was so important to this place it's a wonder we've carried on thus far without him.
  8. I watched some vids either by or about Rohl's ideas a few years ago. I wasn't very convinced but I can't remember why.
  9. Women and Buddhahood

    Hi, This is quite difficult to address and I have my own thoughts on this - which I can't say are very orthodox. Of course in principle the Dharma is for everyone not just men - so from a general perspective there doesn't seem to much justification for suggesting anything misogynistic in Buddhism. However if you look at how Buddhism developed in the first centuries after the Buddha you can see it became increasingly scholastic and monastic, developing quite large communities in monasteries and 'universities' who lived quite separate lives from the lay community and depending on royal subsidy. In these communities which were almost all male an attitude to women and sex developed which can be characterised as negative because the monks were trying not to break their vows of celibacy. This leached out and linked to general cultural mores which saw women as chattels or at least second class citizens. This is probably why the tantric samaya vows (avoidance of root downfalls) specifically disallows the denigration of women - it was an adjustment to the general trend. Obviously the tantricists had a quite different attitude to women and sex to other Buddhists. It is said that the Buddha who created the role of monks (bikhsus) in order to free people up from daily life and the arduous social responsibilities imposed by Vedic religion on householders, resisted at first the idea of nuns but later allowed it being persuaded by his family. But is said to have said that this meant that the dharma would not last as long because of it. My own opinion is that the Buddhas original message was quite quickly captured by scholastics who did not understand non-dualism and fell into various attitudes such as misogyny. This does not mean that all teachers and gurus were like this but that it was a general cultural mileu.
  10. Carbon dating is ok if you remember the +/- errors - and use it as a broad general guide and not cast iron proof. Q: Have you ever used Carbon Dating? A: No - but I've signed up to Match.com (Old jokes are the best, eh?).
  11. What made YOU laugh today/tonight ?

    Joker? Great film.
  12. I find the Phantom Time business, which is new to me, fascinating. After all 'histoire' and similar words in Romance languages from which we get our 'history' just means a story. But a story doesn't really mean a fiction - not in the sense of something fantastical and made up - what I think it means is a narrative supplied in order to make sense of what has happened. It supplies meaning rather than derives meaning. After all, even our recall of fairly recent events is notoriously creaky, and wise/clever people who realise this devote time to supplying narratives e.g. Shakespeare in his historical plays for the late Medieval and Churchill in the post war period. From this we build some kind of view, identity and perspective on the world - as well as a kind of glimpse into underlying truth. The idea that for instance Charlemagne might be a kind of reverse engineered fiction to justify the political power and position of later monarchs is quite appealing. I suppose the narratives of narratives are myths. They become myths I would suggest because of the underlying truth they express. So Gilgamesh is true in some sense even if not literally. In fact literal truth may be unhelpfully dull whereas narrative truth is illuminating. This kind of blows up any idea that History as a subject is a kind of science - along with its related subjects of archeology and anthropology (sociology even) - they are narrative providers really. For instance how often I've found in archeology that vast theories about societies and cultures are built on a very few dusty fragments - an act of creative imagination more than anything.
  13. I've reported him too. Please don't let him put you off continuing this, or starting new threads of this kind. It is one of, or perhaps the best thread on DBs and I'm enjoying it immensely.