Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Ancient History / Forbidden Knowledge / History Rewritten
Register FAQ Chat Social Groups Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 14-04-2012, 08:59 AM   #1
dtango
Junior Member
 
dtango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 15
Default Ancient Egyptian funerary texts

I am of the opinion that scholars and laymen alike know close to nothing about the Egyptian funerary texts which are the oldest and largest collection of archaic texts and at the same time the oldest religious texts.

When the hieroglyphic script was deciphered, the translators of the funerary texts knew of the Egyptian religion, tradition and beliefs what the ancient Greek philosophers, who had been tutored by the Egyptian priesthood, had conveyed to them.

The translators were absolutely certain that the Egyptians, i.e. the people, believed in afterlife and so they forced their translations to agree with this preconception of theirs. In the texts, however, recorded are the oral traditions of a people that believed in a life after judgment and not in life after death. The judgment that the texts are describing is a judgment of living people, of people alive, neither of immortal souls nor of the dead.

On reading the translations one comes across dead people who behave as normal living people: they work, eat, drink, get angry and make sex.
The translators, in order to justify their incomprehensible renderings of the texts, warn their readers in advance that what they are about to read are petty magical incantations:

It is evident that the Book of the Dead is a book of magic. (Myriam Lichtheim)
The Book of the Dead is the name now given to sheets of papyrus covered with magical texts (R.O.Faulkner)

With time, however, the translators noticed that something was wrong. Souls do not build houses neither is there any meaning in referring to the neighborhood where a soul resides.
So they came up with the perfect solution: translate without translating.

James Allen writes: The crucial terms bA, kA, and Ax, are rendered as “ba,” “ka,” and “akh,” respectively, rather than by a translation, because they each carry a wealth of connotations that is often impossible to capture in a single English word (see the Glossary). In a few cases, our knowledge of the Egyptian language has not (yet) made it possible to know the meaning of a verb or noun; such words are represented in the translations by a transliteration of the Egyptian term.

Not knowing the meaning of a few verbs or nouns does not make much difference. But not knowing the meaning of such crucial terms as those previously rendered as “soul” and “spirit, it does make a lot of difference. It means we do not know (yet) what the funerary texts are about.

Here is an example derived from the Pyramid texts:

Utterance 436 §789

Translated by Faulkner: “This mighty one has been made a spirit for the benefit of(?) his soul.

Translated by Allen: “ this controlling power has been akhified for his ba.

The hieroglyphic text reads:

sAx \ sxm \ pn \ bA \ =f
purified \ divine being \ this \ supervisor/caretaker \ his

Purification means that the person who is recognized as pure is automatically elevated socially (from plebe to patrician).
The supervisor of the man who was found –during the process of his evaluation, of his judgment- to be a divine being (a patrician, a noble one) was promoted automatically to a supervisor of a nobleman.

The whole unacceptable situation is based on the fact that scholars refuse to acknowledge that a judgment of the living is described in the texts. The Egyptian priests who modified the funerary texts knew very well what the texts were about. Plato, who studied Egyptian theology in Egypt, wrote about the judgment of the living that was later changed into a judgment of the dead.

“And in the time of Cronos, and even quite lately in the reign of Zeus, the judgment was given on the very day on which the men were to die; the judges were alive, and the men were alive; and the consequence was that the judgments were not well given. Then Pluto and the authorities from the Islands of the Blessed came to Zeus, and said that the souls found their way to the wrong places. Zeus said: "I shall put a stop to this; the judgments are not well given, because the persons who are judged have their clothes on, for they are alive; and there are many who, having evil souls, are apparelled in fair bodies, or encased in wealth or rank, and, when the day of judgment arrives, numerous witnesses come forward and testify on their behalf that they have lived righteously.” .”(Gorgias 523a)

The life after judgment was made to appear as a life after death and thus the concepts of souls, immortality and afterlife came to be.

The fact that accounts of a normal life were interpreted by the Egyptian priests, and later by the ancient Greek philosophers and modern Egyptologists, as accounts of life after death, has created the monstrosity known as Egyptian theology and Egyptian way of thinking in general.

The above hypothesis emerges from studying the texts without prejudice and, normally, it should have been a subject discussed openly. Yet, it is never mentioned when the Egyptian religion is examined, discussed or analyzed.
dtango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-04-2012, 05:51 PM   #2
rapunzel
Senior Member
 
rapunzel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: neath the starred and leafy sky
Posts: 4,776
Default

I have one question dtango, can you read the hieroglyphs and can you understand ancient Egyptian? If not I wonder on what basis you criticise the translations.

Certainly translations can differ because Egyptian is a dead language and we have no one to ask about the exact meanings of certain words or phrases. We know that such elements as the ka and ba may be too complex to accurately describe in a modern language, but then everyone interested in Egyptology knows this (or should know it)

Plato was not speaking of the Egyptians in the quote you gave. What makes you think that he was and why it should relate to Egyptian beliefs.

When you say "The judgment that the texts are describing is a judgment of living people, of people alive, neither of immortal souls nor of the dead." Can you give us some examples of these texts with the correct translation?

Thanks
__________________
"What have you done to the cat, Erwin? He looks half dead."
- Mrs. Schrödinger.


Is it a bit solipsistic in here or is it just me?

I have never caused anyone to weep - Negative Confession Egypt
rapunzel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 09:35 AM   #3
dtango
Junior Member
 
dtango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rapunzel View Post
I have one question dtango, can you read the hieroglyphs and can you understand ancient Egyptian? If not I wonder on what basis you criticise the translations.

Certainly translations can differ because Egyptian is a dead language and we have no one to ask about the exact meanings of certain words or phrases. We know that such elements as the ka and ba may be too complex to accurately describe in a modern language, but then everyone interested in Egyptology knows this (or should know it)
Yes, I can read the hieroglyphs and I understand ancient Egyptian (it is not as difficult as you may think).
As regards terms such as ka and ba they occur thousands of times in the texts and therefore saying that they are too complex to accurately describe in a modern language is an excuse not worthy of academic scholars.
What makes some of those terms hard to comprehend is the fact that they meant one thing 3000 BC and another one 2500 years later.

Most probably you know an Egyptian text entitled “The Dispute of a man with his Ba.” This text has been mocking, for decades now, not only the Egyptologists and the translators, but the entire scientific community because everybody believes of the Egyptians what the Egyptologists taught them to believe.
This work does not belong to the funerary texts and thus the “magic” alibi cannot apply. They have been translating it for 116 years exactly. There were 38 official translation by 1969 and there must be more that 70 by now, yet, they do not know what the texts is about!!
The reason for their failure is very simple: Prejudice !

The text is dealing with a dispute between a man who is on his way to his personal judgment and his supervisor or caretaker who also acts as witness of defense (Ba). The man wants to try for the best possible result, which is to be recognized as equal to the gods. The Ba does not agree because he thinks that the man does not qualify for the status of god and is thus risking his life.
The Ba’s reputation would be endangered if the man fails and so he threatens to live the man alone (in which case the man would have been condemned beforehand without a witness of defense) but he eventually concedes and stays with the man.

The translators, and Egyptologists in general, believe that the man is some sort of lunatic who is having a dispute with his own soul.

“Oh, what is it today?”, the man says, “my soul refuses to answer back to me”!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by rapunzel View Post
Plato was not speaking of the Egyptians in the quote you gave. What makes you think that he was and why it should relate to Egyptian beliefs.
Because as far as I know no other ancient Greek philosopher wrote about a judgment of the living which the gods decided to change into a judgment of the dead.
Plato’s theology is Egyptian theology. In his “Timaeus” Plato describes how his Demiurge (Creator god) fashioned the skull of humans (73e):

And bone He compounded in this wise. Having sifted earth till it was pure and smooth, He kneaded it and moistened it with marrow; then He placed it in fire, and after that dipped it in water, and from this back to fire, and once again in water; and by thus transferring it many times from the one element to the other He made it so that it was soluble by neither. This, then, He used, and fashioned thereof, by turning, a bony sphere round about the brain; and therein he left a narrow opening;

Here follows an extract from the Egyptian “Great Hymn to Khnum”:

He made hair sprout and tresses grow,
Fastened the skin over the limbs;
He built the skull, formed the cheeks,
To furnish shape to the image,
He opened the eyes, hollowed the ears,
He made the body inhale air;
He formed the mouth for eating,
Made the [gorge] for swallowing
(Translation by Myriam Lichtheim)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rapunzel View Post
When you say "The judgment that the texts are describing is a judgment of living people, of people alive, neither of immortal souls nor of the dead." Can you give us some examples of these texts with the correct translation?
In spell 464 of the Coffin Texts occurs a passage which is famous and well known because it is present in all kinds of the funerary texts (Pyramid, Coffin and Papyrus texts).
The man who was found at his judgment to be pure as expected was ferried over to where the gods live and he was given a field of his own. So he says:

I acquire this field of yours, O Hetep, which you love, the Mistress of the Winds, I eat and carouse in it, I drink in it, I plough in it, I reap in it, I am not destroyed in it , I copulate in it.

“I copulate” in the hieroglyphic script is written:

nk \ =j
copulate \ I

“I do not copulate” is written:

n \ nk \ =j
not \ copulate \ I

The spells of the Coffin texts come in many copies and the translators are commenting on the differences between them. In this case the gloss of the translator R. O. Faulkner reads:

so B9C (the id number of the spell in which the above passage occurs); the negation before “nk” is certainly in error, having been derived from an arrangement such as that in B6C, where again the negation surely cannot apply to “nk”, while B5C has it both ways, which makes no sense: B1C, B3C and B1L are correctly in the affirmative.

Please note that the negation applies only to “nk” copulate not to eating and drinking and ploughing the field. The ancient scribes who added the negation knew that love making was prohibited by the gods and, most probably, thought that the texts they were copying from were in error and they simply were correcting the error.
What they did not know was that love making was prohibited only before judgment –something that the translator obviously knows- and that those found pure were allowed to procreate after their judgment.

Remember that in the Egyptian tradition it was not the soul that was judged (the concept of the soul did not exist in the archaic Egyptian tradition) it was the body. When the priesthood transformed the judgment of the living into a judgment of the dead they could not say that now the soul is to be judged because it was impossible to eradicate or falsify the ancient texts. They had to go on judging the body and they resorted to the madness of the mummification.

As you see, we do not need to correct the translations as long as no souls and dead people are involved. We only have to read what is written on the texts and not what the translators tell us that it is written there.
The Egyptian people were not idiots to the point to believe that they could have sex only in afterlife. The scribes who were “correcting” the texts they had real people in mind and not corpses or mummies who insisted in making love in the Underworld.

The funerary texts contain the oldest oral traditions of the humanity and we know so little of our past.
dtango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 12:02 PM   #4
decode reality
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dtango View Post
I am of the opinion that scholars and laymen alike know close to nothing about the Egyptian funerary texts which are the oldest and largest collection of archaic texts and at the same time the oldest religious texts.

When the hieroglyphic script was deciphered, the translators of the funerary texts knew of the Egyptian religion, tradition and beliefs what the ancient Greek philosophers, who had been tutored by the Egyptian priesthood, had conveyed to them.

The translators were absolutely certain that the Egyptians, i.e. the people, believed in afterlife and so they forced their translations to agree with this preconception of theirs. In the texts, however, recorded are the oral traditions of a people that believed in a life after judgment and not in life after death. The judgment that the texts are describing is a judgment of living people, of people alive, neither of immortal souls nor of the dead.

On reading the translations one comes across dead people who behave as normal living people: they work, eat, drink, get angry and make sex.
The translators, in order to justify their incomprehensible renderings of the texts, warn their readers in advance that what they are about to read are petty magical incantations:

It is evident that the Book of the Dead is a book of magic. (Myriam Lichtheim)
The Book of the Dead is the name now given to sheets of papyrus covered with magical texts (R.O.Faulkner)

With time, however, the translators noticed that something was wrong. Souls do not build houses neither is there any meaning in referring to the neighborhood where a soul resides.
So they came up with the perfect solution: translate without translating.

James Allen writes: The crucial terms bA, kA, and Ax, are rendered as “ba,” “ka,” and “akh,” respectively, rather than by a translation, because they each carry a wealth of connotations that is often impossible to capture in a single English word (see the Glossary). In a few cases, our knowledge of the Egyptian language has not (yet) made it possible to know the meaning of a verb or noun; such words are represented in the translations by a transliteration of the Egyptian term.

Not knowing the meaning of a few verbs or nouns does not make much difference. But not knowing the meaning of such crucial terms as those previously rendered as “soul” and “spirit, it does make a lot of difference. It means we do not know (yet) what the funerary texts are about.

Here is an example derived from the Pyramid texts:

Utterance 436 §789

Translated by Faulkner: “This mighty one has been made a spirit for the benefit of(?) his soul.

Translated by Allen: “ this controlling power has been akhified for his ba.

The hieroglyphic text reads:

sAx \ sxm \ pn \ bA \ =f
purified \ divine being \ this \ supervisor/caretaker \ his

Purification means that the person who is recognized as pure is automatically elevated socially (from plebe to patrician).
The supervisor of the man who was found –during the process of his evaluation, of his judgment- to be a divine being (a patrician, a noble one) was promoted automatically to a supervisor of a nobleman.

The whole unacceptable situation is based on the fact that scholars refuse to acknowledge that a judgment of the living is described in the texts. The Egyptian priests who modified the funerary texts knew very well what the texts were about. Plato, who studied Egyptian theology in Egypt, wrote about the judgment of the living that was later changed into a judgment of the dead.

“And in the time of Cronos, and even quite lately in the reign of Zeus, the judgment was given on the very day on which the men were to die; the judges were alive, and the men were alive; and the consequence was that the judgments were not well given. Then Pluto and the authorities from the Islands of the Blessed came to Zeus, and said that the souls found their way to the wrong places. Zeus said: "I shall put a stop to this; the judgments are not well given, because the persons who are judged have their clothes on, for they are alive; and there are many who, having evil souls, are apparelled in fair bodies, or encased in wealth or rank, and, when the day of judgment arrives, numerous witnesses come forward and testify on their behalf that they have lived righteously.” .”(Gorgias 523a)

The life after judgment was made to appear as a life after death and thus the concepts of souls, immortality and afterlife came to be.

The fact that accounts of a normal life were interpreted by the Egyptian priests, and later by the ancient Greek philosophers and modern Egyptologists, as accounts of life after death, has created the monstrosity known as Egyptian theology and Egyptian way of thinking in general.

The above hypothesis emerges from studying the texts without prejudice and, normally, it should have been a subject discussed openly. Yet, it is never mentioned when the Egyptian religion is examined, discussed or analyzed.
I'm in agreement of the limits and flaws of Egyptology, however I wonder how much the above cited authors touch upon the following?

Classical ancient Egyptian culture was African (as in the same people who would later populate sub Saharan Africa after Egypt's demise). The culture and its spiritual systems not only shared many similar characteristics with 'black Africa', it had much in common with its contemporary nations such as India and Sumer, Sumer being the source of what later became 'Jewish' kabbalah/tree of life.

Most western Egyptologists are notorious for suppressing this information. The Egyptian language has more in common with African languages than it does any other family of languages. One word having many other meanings depending upon tone and context, is commonplace in African languages.

'Book of the Dead' isn't the correct name. That was the name given to it by grave robbers (archaelogists) who saw the book buried with the dead. 'Pert em Heru' means the book of becoming awake, 'awake' being a metaphor for a high stage of spiritual growth.

Egyptologists had a problem. On the one hand, they would study those ancient cultures in a purely left brain/intellectual manner, when in fact in its entirety, it's an entire way of life that can only be understood holistically (higher aspects of the right brain). Left brain speculation is unable to "understand" or see the inner aspect of any subject/phenomena. For instance, the ancients were able to speak of different aspects of consciousness by directly experiencing them, via various meditation practises (via the right brain) as one example. The Egyptologists stood outside the subject, making mental speculations that lacked this experience. Despite this, they would still set themselves up as 'authorities' and 'experts'.
decode reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 01:23 PM   #5
munt
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 78
Default

the egyptians are travelling at a different speed to the rest of human dead.
Its not so much a case of translating their heiroglyphs as it is understanding why their soul energy is the way it is!

1) when a person commits suicide their soul goes into limbo and their corporeal power becomes weak and subject to magical force.
2) a pharoah would have several suicide slaves buried with him
3) the principle is that their limbo souls become magical extensions of his energy.. the collateral damage whilst he thrives on a fibre of life in the otherworld!The pahroahs followers respecting his afterlife portion.. whislt the slaves afterlife is as crushed as their living relatives by the caste system!
4) clouded and mathematicly enshrouded in the dead the original egyptian is hard to define from his slaves distorted remains.
5) any translation of original funery items is rendered extremeley difficult.. usually enslaving an unknown portion of the translator!
(the part of him that is incompetant of limbo navigation)
6) genocide has a similar effect of enshrouding the master in mass death!
7) as does government through suppression and hence futility of purpose ending in death of citizens..and mass autopsy by rote of a countries dead gives power the government doesnt understand to the otherworld extension of governments who do undertand!

Although you have to respect a magical system which can maintain life energy within the dead.. you have to also be a little bit dismayed by the lack of ethics involved in crushing a people after death in order to support such a awarness structure..
to add to that consider the amount of life energy lost to our civilisation as it meanders around the unknown egyptian energy body!
NOTHING is without effect.. and as we have many civilisational awarness probl;ems, possibly one of the first steps of clarity would be to CLOSE the egytpian doors and underworld.. before re-alignment..
i doubt our people will survive through the use of ancient egyptian artefacts by incompetant illuminatus.
The ancient egyptian priesthood rites lasted many years..
todays illuminatus much like reiki.. just pay money for somehting no-one understands and then hollow out their own space. (not only against the flow of other people, but also without the knowledge the egytpians had) caphonic quarters just ripping neighbours to bits..)

Its ironic really.. particularly with all the talk of reptilians.NO-one ever seems to mention that the egyptian crocodile god.. walks forward but faces backwards.
the reptilian is supposed to close soul energy..
NOWADAYS THOUGH.. the reptilian form is used to distort it further.. to keep a few hundred ego trippers happy.
consequently we are all lost on an ancient thorn, soul energy accross the planet is warped beyond recognition.. AND the very basic alignment of the afterworld and human soul has been betrayed.
1,000,000) The very basis of the reptilian shapeshift is alignment of transdimensional soul energy.. something not yet achieved on this planet..
what we have is echoes , reflection and shards of wasted knowledge... visions designed to remind us of the search, but which too many people take as knowledge itself!

The reptilian god walks forward but faces backward..UNDERSTAND.. sooner or later we have to recognise the indigo child.. the bridge builder..The 60s was great.. but the kids today are a world apart.. The bridge builders , the indigo child remembers.. the indigo children crossed the millenium youth and have a downward rod into the natural calendar of earth))

Last edited by munt; 15-04-2012 at 02:06 PM.
munt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 06:47 PM   #6
dtango
Junior Member
 
dtango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by decode reality View Post
'Book of the Dead' isn't the correct name. That was the name given to it by grave robbers (archaelogists) who saw the book buried with the dead. 'Pert em Heru' means the book of becoming awake, 'awake' being a metaphor for a high stage of spiritual growth.
I am afraid there is nothing spiritual about “Pert em Heru” (prt m hrw).
From Chapter 110 of the Book of the Dead:

R(w) \ nw \ prt \ m \ hrw \ aq \ prt \ m \ xert-nTr
Utterances \ of \ going \ into \ the day (light) \ entering \ proceeding \ into \ Neter-khert

Pert em Heru ….. going out into the light
Pert em Neter-khert… going out into the gods’ land
Pert em Iment… going out into the West

All the above phrases have the same meaning. The person who manages to go successfully through his personal judgment will leave the land of darkness where he used to live and will go into the land of light where the gods live.

The funerary texts are extremely realistic and easy to understand once one disregards the imaginary esoteric sense of the texts.
The Egyptian people had no interest in high stages of spiritual growth, their preoccupation was survival.
dtango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 07:01 PM   #7
decode reality
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dtango View Post
I am afraid there is nothing spiritual about “Pert em Heru” (prt m hrw).
From Chapter 110 of the Book of the Dead:

R(w) \ nw \ prt \ m \ hrw \ aq \ prt \ m \ xert-nTr
Utterances \ of \ going \ into \ the day (light) \ entering \ proceeding \ into \ Neter-khert

Pert em Heru ….. going out into the light
Pert em Neter-khert… going out into the gods’ land
Pert em Iment… going out into the West

All the above phrases have the same meaning. The person who manages to go successfully through his personal judgment will leave the land of darkness where he used to live and will go into the land of light where the gods live.

The funerary texts are extremely realistic and easy to understand once one disregards the imaginary esoteric sense of the texts.
The Egyptian people had no interest in high stages of spiritual growth, their preoccupation was survival.
The culture wasn't without flaws but was the spirituality that enabled their survival. I disagree with everything else you've posted so I'll leave it here.
decode reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 07:43 PM   #8
munt
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 78
Default

The egyptian dynasties DIDNT survive! what are you talking about?
munt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 01:06 AM   #9
whaaat
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 92
Default

dear op.

i have a question it seems like you could answer.


Bring me those who repel evil when I have passed you by at the polar region of Tepen. 'Where have you come from?' 'O Tepen, I have come from the Lake of Burning in the Field of Fire.


I bring along with me the things which drive back calamities as I advance over the passage of the god Pen; thou comest, how great art thou, O god Pen! I have come from the Pool of Flame which is in the Sekhet-Sasa


what is it? god pen or tepen or is tepen = god pen?

thanks in advance.
whaaat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 06:12 AM   #10
decode reality
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by munt View Post
The egyptian dynasties DIDNT survive! what are you talking about?
They survived for many centuries until having to fend off invasions and internal disarray got the better of them.
decode reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 08:54 AM   #11
dtango
Junior Member
 
dtango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whaaat View Post
dear op.

i have a question it seems like you could answer.

Bring me those who repel evil when I have passed you by at the polar region of Tepen. 'Where have you come from?' 'O Tepen, I have come from the Lake of Burning in the Field of Fire.

I bring along with me the things which drive back calamities as I advance over the passage of the god Pen; thou comest, how great art thou, O god Pen! I have come from the Pool of Flame which is in the Sekhet-Sasa

what is it? god pen or tepen or is tepen = god pen?
In order to answer your question you must tell me where the above passage comes from to see if I can compare it with some other translator’s rendering or even find the hieroglyphic texts.
“Pen,” for example, may be the name of the god or it may be just the demonstrative pronoun “pn” which means “this” i.e. near me, at hand, both of time and place.

“Sxm pn” (Sechem pen) “Divine being this” refers to a divine being close by or to the divine being discussed. The same happens with the word nTr (neter) “god.”
“NTr pn” (Neter pen) “God this.” Meaning “this one god.”

With Egyptian texts, and especially funerary texts, one has to have the hieroglyphic text, to work on it and decide on the best translation.

“Lake of Burning” or “Pool of Flame,” for example, is an expression good for poetic and theological compositions but not for the realistic funerary texts. Ι believe that the correct rendering is “Burnt out estate” but in order to analyze the words involved the glyphs are necessary.

In utterance 246 § 253 we read:

James Allen translating: … and [Pepi Neferkare] has missed [the Great Lake’s wrath].
R.O.Faulkner translating: the striking power of the Great Lake has missed him.

The above renderings are based on the translators’ belief that the texts are magic incantations. Working for a while with the signs, however, one comes up with the reasonable translation: he avoided visiting the great estate (where the judgments was taking place because he had made arrangements to skip judgment).

As you see, when it comes to the funerary texts you cannot trust the translations as long as they are not done word for word on the hieroglyphic text.
dtango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 11:27 AM   #12
whaaat
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 92
Default

papyrus of nu [on bringing a boat in heaven]. tepen is faulkner and god pen is allen i believe.

since you mention plato you could see parallels between the circles of ra in neserser with a god pen and atlantis with the pen of geryon at gadiera.
whaaat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 05:54 PM   #13
dtango
Junior Member
 
dtango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whaaat View Post
papyrus of nu [on bringing a boat in heaven]. tepen is faulkner and god pen is allen i believe.
You have to tell me what chapter (or spell) of the Book of the Dead the passage comes from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whaaat View Post
since you mention plato you could see parallels between the circles of ra in neserser with a god pen and atlantis with the pen of geryon at gadiera.
You are quite right! Especially if you take into account the hyperbola passing over the Great Circle of Chlapatsibano.
dtango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 06:16 PM   #14
whaaat
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 92
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dtango View Post
You have to tell me what chapter (or spell) of the Book of the Dead the passage comes from.

You are quite right! Especially if you take into account the hyperbola passing over the Great Circle of Chlapatsibano.
sheet 9 is as close as i can get i think.
whaaat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 07:59 PM   #15
dtango
Junior Member
 
dtango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whaaat View Post
sheet 9 is as close as i can get i think.
ΟΚ! It is Spell 98 but as this Spell is missing from the papyrus of Ani (of which the hieroglyphic text is available) and I have not been able to find the original text or a transliteration of the text of Spell 98, I cannot be of help.

I’ll keep trying!
dtango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 08:32 PM   #16
whaaat
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 92
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dtango View Post
ΟΚ! It is Spell 98 but as this Spell is missing from the papyrus of Ani (of which the hieroglyphic text is available) and I have not been able to find the original text or a transliteration of the text of Spell 98, I cannot be of help.

I’ll keep trying!
yep its missing from ani. nu is The place tepen [or "god pen" or whatever it really is] occurs... a great enclosure in the duat that survives the great flood [not Great Flood] is found in a few texts however.

this egyptian story [atlantis and gadiera in freshwater okeanos] closely parallels the two varas of yima in lake vourukasa and enki's bolts and abzu in the abzu. there is also the bahitra of vishnu and the seventh manu to round things out pretty well.

so in the end i think it [the duat] is a real place the predynastics had to leave and couldn't get back to until khufus time possibly... so that is to say i agree with flinders petrie pretty much but i think they have finally found it.

cheers. good luck and thanks
whaaat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-04-2012, 08:23 AM   #17
unity808
Senior Member
 
unity808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 182
Default

dear op...

i think you have got it....as far as what these actual funerary texts portray...
--
they are honorable events being depicted

where people were found to be in harmony with the god archetypes
----
these were ultimate bragging rights in egypt

displayed to show an honorable life
-----
sir you need to get in touch with the serious egyptologists

true knowledge gathering there----underground genius archaelogy

perfect----the gateway of 2012
unity808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-04-2012, 09:05 PM   #18
whaaat
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 92
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dtango View Post
You have to tell me what chapter (or spell) of the Book of the Dead the passage comes from.
is this it? sheet 9?



bm

more sheets here
whaaat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-04-2012, 09:19 AM   #19
dtango
Junior Member
 
dtango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whaaat View Post
is this it? sheet 9?
Yes, it is! But sheet 9 contains various spells, not only spell 98 and if I was to locate in the papyrus itself your passage, it would have taken ages.
I need the passage in print signs as, for example, spell 42 in website http://www.scribd.com/doc/78982138/C...-Papyrus-of-Nu.
dtango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-04-2012, 12:57 PM   #20
whaaat
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 92
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dtango View Post
Yes, it is! But sheet 9 contains various spells, not only spell 98 and if I was to locate in the papyrus itself your passage, it would have taken ages.
I need the passage in print signs as, for example, spell 42 in website http://www.scribd.com/doc/78982138/C...-Papyrus-of-Nu.
exactly its just the top left corner but it means they have the whole page already photographed because thats a detail photo and its usually on the webpage with the whole sheet photo. i'm trying to make a case for the gang [the evil check writers] to buy it for me. bm loves to sell stuff but if they have to make a special effort it costs alot.

i imagine they'll push lapps book.
whaaat is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:02 PM.