Apech

btw - do you know the name of the serpent pictured here:

 

 

why dont you tell us about this one, hmm?

This is from the upper register of the 11th Hour of the Amduat and although the serpent is unnamed it is Neheb-kau and the figure standing between the wings is Atum.

The name 'Neheb-kau' means the 'he who unites/allots the ka-energy' ... a reference to the continuum of power which generates and links together the vibrational manifestations of power (Atum = 'the complete one' ... i.e. the whole field of power itself). The two eyes are the two eyes of Horus which have been reunited at this stage (11th hour i.e. just before dawn) ... on Atum's head is the sun disk .... the sun rises in the 12th hour but is formed (ie.e. given shape in the akhet = eastern horizon just before it appears.

The Egyptian Set was not really evil= Satan but an equal/opposite force to Horus ...

In the early period the kings would take Horus and/or Set as their deity ... and their was the great New Kingdom king Seti I ...

... but Set did kill Osiris ... so thus he was held in contempt in some periods.

Maybe Satan is more like Apophis ... the serpent who opposes the Sun. But I think that Satan is actually a creation of the Christian Church and a distortion of old pagan gods.

Heard on the news that she has just died ... so posting this in her memory ....

Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....(lots of a) h.

That's not your little pony.

He was momentarily being sucked into a black hole but he was able to escape the event horizon.

 

But I do agree. Nah!

The black hole will eat the unbelievers.

naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

Is your finger stuck to your keyboard?

As it is torn apart, the turbulent area around the black hole will become unusually bright, giving astronomers a chance to learn more about it.

An article in Nature suggests the spectacle should be visible in 2013.

Researchers using the European Southern Observatory's Very Large Telescope estimate that despite its size, the cloud has a total mass of only about three times that of Earth.

They have plotted the cloud's squashed, oval-shaped path and estimate it has doubled its speed in the last seven years - to 2,350km per second.

It should spiral in to within about 40 billion kilometres of the black hole in the middle of 2013.

BBC website science article

.... maybe some kind of 2012 related thing ??????

You just had to post.

I would too.

MPG has become the new sean denty

**** Moderator Message *****

Joining TTBs with the sole purpose of attacking another member is not ok. Our checks indicate that Nutcracker is a pseudonym for another already banned member. Nutcracker is banned also.

Apech for Mod Team

**** Mod Message Ends *****

I concede to you. Of course, I won't blindly accept everything that I read on the internet, it is just that Massey's assertions seemed right, so I had believed it for a while. So I accept that it's probable you are right.

 

What do you make of the assertion that Jesus' life was based on Pagan myth?

I think that just as most churches are built on old pagan sites so too the jesus story has incorporated a lot of pagan myths. For instance his 'birthdate' of 25th december is the old Roman festival of Saturnalia ... Saturn being the 'Lord of Misrule'. Whether or not this means that there was no historical Jesus is not the same thing of course.

It is true that if you look at a lot of Jewish and Christian mysticism then you can trace roots back to the older cultures of Egypt and Sumeria. For instance Genesis is a watered down version of the Heliopolitan creation myth ... I think the Tree of Life from Kabbalah shows some Egyptian influence as does western alchemy and hermeticism generally. So there is a lot of stuff in the mix ... also the theology of people like Thomas Aquinas and St. Anslem is largely rehashed Greek Platonism or Neo-Platonism ... so the idea that Christianity is all new and unique is completely wrong.

I cannot offer any evidence but my feeling/intuition is that there was a historical Jesus ... what he was actually like is of course shrouded in the huge edifice of the Church(s) and all the baggage of 2000 years of history.

Of course I don't have access to ancient Egyptian documents or manuscripts which might detail the life of Horus. All I can do is read from several sources and believe what I think sounds the most plausible.

 

http://answers.yahoo...07194328AAd6rQc This link is a starter, there are several links which follow from it. I am also reading "The Secret Teachings" by Gene Kieffer, which summarizes Gerald Massey's work. http://en.wikipedia....Horus_and_Jesus

OK I don't mean this in an aggressive way but I have studied Ancient Egypt for several decades and I do have access to many source texts (many of which are easily available in translation if you google) and I can say that this idea of Horus=Christ is completely bogus. For instance from your first link ...

After doing some research it has come to my attention that Jesus is almost exactly like the Egyptian God Horus. Both were born of a virgin on Dec 25th and visited by 3 Kings. Both were baptized by a "Baptist" who was beheaded. Started to preach at the age of 30 and had 12 diciples. Both were Crucified and buried; then resurrected. Why do you think the bible took this story for Jesus?

There is no tradition that Isis (the mother of Horus) was a virgin. There is no link between the birth of Horus and 25th December and there were no three kings. Horus was not baptised and if anyone was beheaded it was his mother Isis who was beheaded by Horus who replaced her head by a that of a cow. Horus was not crucified .... and he did not resurrect.

The work of Gerald Massey has been completely discredited ... and only lives on in the minds of those who like to post nonsense on the internet.

The only real cultural link between Horus and Christ is that there is a similarity between the statues of Isis and the child horus and the representations of Mary and the baby Jesus ... so it is entirely possible that the Christian artists used the iconography of Ancient Egypt.

Horus (Hr ... ) means either 'he who is distant' or 'he who is above' and this refers to his original nature as a sky god. Later he was thought of as the son of Osiris and his main role int hat respect was to fight Osiris' brother Set (who had murdered him) for the throne of Egypt ... the battle lasted eighty years and Horus was eventually victorious .... the Egyptian kings saw them selves as incarnations of Horus. In childhood the baby Horus was injured by a scorpion bite and was cured by Isis and Serqet (the scorpion goddess). During the fight with Set his eye was injured and had to be later restored by Thoth the god of wisdom and healing. It is these events which is probably what Massey thought of as resurrection but if anyone was brought back from the dead it was Osiris his father and not Horus.

Many Egyptologists are desperate to find links in Ancient Egypt to the Bible and Judeo-Chrstian thought ... but they are not there .... the Egyptian religion was quite different.

Stunning ... thanks for posting.

Historical analysis shows that Jesus' life as it is told in the gospels is actually the story of Horus from ancient Egypt. The stories and myths all originate in ancient civilization. Paganism evolved from these myths of gods, angels, and other divine actors, and was a popular European religion before the Roman Church hijacked the myths and assigned them to Jesus.

 

.... <snip>

There is no story from Ancient Egypt which involves Horus and is comparable with Jesus. Perhaps if you would like to list the events or actions which you think are the same and I will be able to demonstrate that they are not. Or perhaps you can show where you got this idea from ... and which 'historical analysis' you mean.

Best wishes Aaron ... you have added a lot to this forum and hope you will find a way to stick around.

Prayers and thoughts for a lucky break for you ...

A.

but clearly you didn't forget your logon info for TTB

 

and THATs what matters

Clearly that's who I am now.

And what year do you suppose Jesus's existence was?The Jews did not except Jesus as a Messiah.

 

Do you believe in the historical existence of Mithras too, who was born Dec 25,died and resurrected?

 

What about Horus?

 

Those dying and resurrecting deities pre date Jesus by far,this would mean Jesus was not a historical person.

Just the thought of little white Jesus not existing makes some christians very angry,I don't play favorites with dying and resurrecting demi-gods that were born dec 25,because I love multiculturalism.

Horus was not resurrected. Mithras was clearly a deity. 25 th Dec was Saturnalia i.e. a few days past the winter solstice - taken over by the church as jesus' birth date.

I am not a Christian by the way.

I've forgotten who I am. Welcome back.

Mark,this doesn't qualify as historical evidence.I can write some scriptures right now with my own mythologies about santa clause,travel to the dessert,hide the scriptures in a cave.Then, a thousand years from now some crack head, heroin junkie will find my scriptures in the cave,translate them and start some weird santa clause religion.

Right ... so you are trying to say Santa doesn't exist now! No presents for you this year!

PS. Just for the record I think there was a historical Jesus. The reasons for the resonances with ancient teachings (e.g. Egypt) could be that he fulfilled them ... as in fulfilled the 'law'. Obviously you have to wade through the censorship of the catholic church and a lot of wishful thinking by believers to get at the truth.

hA! Mark is not dark, not spacey at all, actually. He's crystal clear, profoundly lucid, emanates light. A fantastic articulate teacher with a lovely laugh and can knock your socks of in the smoothest most powerful way, if you are receptive to him.

 

Took me a while to get used to his delivery though.

 

But I love Marlon Brando, in anything. Even butter.

Well I don't mind being told off ... but I said 'it' seemed ark and spacy ... i.e. the sadhana = 'arising in the form of emptiness'. I didn't say he was .... but I take your point ... and would like to see more if there is any ... but maybe wishing for more is like a Streetcar Named Desire and I'm wishing for the comfort of strangers. (lol).

Excellent questions TI. I hope to come back to them later when I have more time. However just quickly now I would say that in some of these descriptions there seems to be a mixture of formal description and experiential description. I think that part of the initial learning for practice is to learn to focus one pointedly without effort ... but that can be misleading because effort of some kind or energy expenditure is needed to move from a scattered, busy mind to a quiet focused one. But the actual achievement of dharana or eka-citta/eka-grata is not effortful but more a kind of resting or complete engagement perhaps.

In terms of mind-content there is a letting come letting go process ... but in terms of the dharana there is a complete absorption in the meditation object. So if you were to say what you are doing it would be single pointed focus ... but if you were to describe the general state you might say that you are not holding on to anything. Maybe.

I would say ... as you seem to be an experienced practitioner ... trust your own experience and its validity. Failing that go with the authentic original ... i.e. Patanjali ... because some teachers like to sell easier paths ... (?).

A.

I don't wish to offend but I kept thinking of Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now ... it seemed very dark and spacey to me ... not my cup of tea these days ... but I hope it helps those who practice this.

That is my problem. I cannot define something that does not exist. (Speaking only from my own understanding.)

 

I can define a rabbit but I cannot define the Easter Bunny.

 

I cannot define Tao but I can talk about some of its aspects (the Manifest realm).

 

I can talk about a person's consciousness but I cannot talk about a stone's consciousness.

 

So little do I really know!!!

When you say God does not exist - you must have an idea about what you mean - otherwise the words are meaningless. It's just that people seem to mean a whole lot of different things when they say God.

My Dad is an atheist (although being strict rationalist he would say you cannot disprove what you don't know so he calls himself agnostic ... but he doesn't really mean it ... he's just being super cautious in a strict rationalist sense). So I was brought up with only 'cultural' religion in my life - and that was pretty sparse. So I am naturally an atheist but am drawn through personal experience to spirituality ... so I tend to think in terms of 'energy'/'consciousness' or whatever term you might like to use.

I don't naturally talk about God because the term means very little to me. But I find most people are reacting to the 'sunday school' term ... an old man somewhere who knows everything about you and issues moral guidelines written in stone ... and I would wholeheartedly agree that this God does not exist.

However if someone prefers to use God as meaning the origin and source of everything ... I don't have a problem with that. Logic suggests to me that since I know I am conscious ... then that consciousness must have an origin or source ... and that could be terms God by some. I can't accept that consciousness arises in 'dead' matter ... it doesn't make any sense to me logically and my experiences suggest otherwise.

Materialism is a kind of dualism ... since matter is only one state of energy (which I think we established earlier) ... so i can't believe in the fundamental reality of something which is only an effect caused by something else.

All very interesting anyway .... and I appreciate the chance to discuss ... I am sure we will return to this again and again .

Define God please. By which I mean the way in which the word can be applied.