Why "osiris" Didn't Exist Before The 5th Dynasty.

[Windowpane]

12 minutes ago, Scott Creighton said:

 

Repyling to Wepwawet, who said:

No, because both of you failed utterly to deal with this question. You have stated multiple times that the phrase "Osiris N" exists in the PT. . .

SC: I stated no such thing. Stop fibbing.

Well: you said this (The Great Pyramid's Greatest Secret (Hidden in Plain Sight) - Exploring the Purpose of the Great Pyramid's 4 Enigmatic Shafts -  (#1404 :

Quote

What is clear from the Pyramid Texts (and other ancient sources) is that Osiris N (the deceased king) had to have his body re-assembled ...

 

[Trelane]

34 minutes ago, Windowpane said:

Well: you said this (The Great Pyramid's Greatest Secret (Hidden in Plain Sight) - Exploring the Purpose of the Great Pyramid's 4 Enigmatic Shafts -  (#1404 :

 

Amazing how quickly @Scott Creightonthinks everyone has forgotten his stream of "stuff'' from other threads.

[Wepwawet]

56 minutes ago, Scott Creighton said:

I stated no such thing. Stop fibbing.

SC

The "you" in the text was for cladking because the post was a reply to him. On the other hand, you, Creighton, when asked the same question about "Osiris N" failed to come up with a response, which perhaps you should have as this issue is about the nature of Osiris, is it the god himself or the dead kin  in the texts in question. It is you who state that the pyramid is Osiris is it not, so the question is as relevant to you as it is to cladking. So I have not lied as I have never stated that you have said that "Osiris N" appears in the PT, and your post was just more chaff.

[Scott Creighton]

2 hours ago, Windowpane said:

Well: you said this (The Great Pyramid's Greatest Secret (Hidden in Plain Sight) - Exploring the Purpose of the Great Pyramid's 4 Enigmatic Shafts -  (#1404 :

What is clear from the Pyramid Texts (and other ancient sources) is that Osiris N (the deceased king) had to have his body re-assembled 

Where do I say this is stated in the PTs?  Take your time.

SC

[Scott Creighton]

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

The "you" in the text was for cladking because the post was a reply to him. 

Syntactically the word 'you' is always plural. The context of your statement included myself.  I made no such comment, as you well know.

SC

[Wepwawet]

8 minutes ago, Scott Creighton said:

Syntactically the word 'you' is always plural. The context of your statement included myself.  I made no such comment, as you well know.

SC

Pathetic, you falsely accuse me of lying and now you wriggle about and throw out even more chaff. You and cladking make a fine couple of disingenous and extraordinary obtuse "fellows".

Edited November 2, 2023 by Wepwawet

[Antigonos]

16 minutes ago, Wepwawet said:

Pathetic, you falsely accuse me of lying and now you wriggle about and throw out even more chaff. You and cladking make a fine couple of disingenous and extraordinary obtuse "fellows".

The Wonder Twins of BS.

[cladking]

5 hours ago, Kenemet said:

While it helps to present a cohesive picture, it also misses a lot of the nuances. 

The non standard English into which Allen translated the PT is not "nuance".  

5 hours ago, Kenemet said:

For that, you need the individual texts.

This is Allen's contention.  

5 hours ago, Kenemet said:

There is no place you could actually find a written document that matches completely the (compiled) text of Masperro & company.

This is irrelevant.  These are mere rituals written by the great pyramid builders and it doesn't matter where they came from.  Allen believes in magic and superstition so he attached a lot of weight even to their exact location. Allen's work is Is not relevant to the meaning of the writing.  All of the translators have butchered the meaning and their precise methodology for destroying it is irrelevant.

Essentially they all translated a book of ritual in terms of the "book of the dead" and turned it into incantation. I'm not worried about "nuance", I'm worried about why they said the pyramids are not tombs and what was meant by assembling osiris.  

[cladking]

5 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

No, because both of you failed utterly to deal with this question. You have stated multiple times that the phrase "Osiris N" exists in the PT, therefore you should be able to provide an example of the image below. You can use this link to go through Sethe's transcriptions. It shouldn't even take that long as the name Osiris when referring to the king will usually, but not always, appear at the start of a line of text.

This below is not "Osiris N", it is a Latin N placed into a cartouche where there is a lacuna after the name Osiris. Mercer in his translations uses the formula "Osiris N", Faulkner uses "Osiris the king", Allen uses "Osiris king", and in all cases they are referring to the king as an Osiris, not the actual god. The fact that the Latin N has been placed into a cartouche in itself shows that it is the dead king who is being referred to and not the god, but I'll let you try to explain why, or rather, let's see what bizarre mental gymnastics you employ here, but I'll give a hint, check out what Akhenaten, uniquely in their entire history, did to the Aten.

 

 

For the last time.  You have created a semantical argument focused on the single letter "N".  As you should know "N" is merely a placeholder for the names of specific dead kings.  If they were alive their name would just be "N".  If their heart had not yet been used to calibrate the funicular their name would still be "N".  

 

I will not return to your semantics.

[cladking]

3 hours ago, Windowpane said:

Additional info.: Wiki on Wernicke's area; and Broca's area.

Broca's 1861 discovery (Fr.) (as explained in the Wiki, click "à télécharger" for 2014 English version of Roland Bauchot's 2009 analysis of this paper; or "Téléchargez le texte de Paul Broca" for the original [Fr.]).

 

Wernicke, C.: Der aphasische Symptomencomplex. Eine psychologische Studie auf anatomischer Basis [The aphasic symptom complex: a psychological study from an anatomical basis]; Breslau, M. Crohn und Weigert, 1874.

We have significantly more knowledge about these today than in the past.  However we still don't know what consciousness is and haven't even defined it scientifically.  We don't know how people think so we obviously don't know if the great pyramid builders think like us or not.  I simply maintain they all thought alike in four dimensions unlike any living human being and this is why people today don't understand simple concepts like osirisn or why they built the pyramids. 

[Trelane]

So, he doesn't know what he's looking at let alone able to translate it? Shocking. 

Not that I am expertly versed in any ancient languages or texts or anything.

[cladking]

3 hours ago, Windowpane said:

What is clear from the Pyramid Texts (and other ancient sources) is that Osiris N (the deceased king) had to have his body re-assembled ...

This is quite true and appears all through the PT.  Only when the body was assembled and a good looking collar was on the neck of re could the new body of N be assembled.  

[Thanos5150]

14 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

That ship said over a decade ago. No, he's really just an idiot. 

Speaking of idiots, that should be "sailed" not "said". 

Edited November 2, 2023 by Thanos5150

[Wepwawet]

6 minutes ago, cladking said:

For the last time.  You have created a semantical argument focused on the single letter "N".  As you should know "N" is merely a placeholder for the names of specific dead kings.  If they were alive their name would just be "N".  If their heart had not yet been used to calibrate the funicular their name would still be "N".  

 

I will not return to your semantics.

Myself and other posters told you what the "N" meant, and yet you still maintained that "Osirs N" existed in the PT, and produced as "evidence" the transliterations with the Latin "N", and now you dare present this post, this utter garbage, this worthless smokescreen of total BS. You are a very sad fantasist, a poster who cannot be trusted to engage in anything like a proper discourse due to your fantasies and extreme obtuseness, your twisting and warping of every post, your habit of spitting in the face of anybody who tries to help you see at least some reality, your habit of invading every thread in any forum where there is a discussion about the PT, and it is so bad that nobody can ever have a real discussion because of you and your insane BS.

[cladking]

1 minute ago, cladking said:

Only when the body was assembled and a good looking collar was on the neck of re could the new body of N be assembled.  

Unless it was too cloudy of course.  It is impossible to communicate perfectly in any language.  AL made true statements but one still had to parse reality; look at the context in terms of reality.  ie- when it was cloudy re wore no collar even when they worked because the collar is a rainbow on the nb-wt-mound upon which they had set up their funicular to build a new body for osiris n.  

Utterance 326.

534a. To say: Collar, beloved of Horus, good-looking, which is on the neck of Rē‘.

534b. If thou goest to heaven; so will N. go to heaven.

The utterance is literally true and in accord with the laws of nature like all the utterances.  However each individual knew that "atum n" can stand even on cloudy days.  

Reality is highly complex and still the PT is in accordance with it.  It's individual perception and individual perspectives that can be out of whack.  

[Thanos5150]

12 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

Don’t try to explain something to me that you’re too incompetent to know anything about, it just sounds like explosive diarrhea. 

You sure, because it sounded more like projectile vomit to me. 

[Antigonos]

4 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said:

Speaking of idiots, that should be "sailed" no "said". 

At least you owned it, bro.

[cormac mac airt]

9 minutes ago, cladking said:

Unless it was too cloudy of course.  It is impossible to communicate perfectly in any language.  AL made true statements but one still had to parse reality; look at the context in terms of reality.  ie- when it was cloudy re wore no collar even when they worked because the collar is a rainbow on the nb-wt-mound upon which they had set up their funicular to build a new body for osiris n.  

Utterance 326.

534a. To say: Collar, beloved of Horus, good-looking, which is on the neck of Rē‘.

534b. If thou goest to heaven; so will N. go to heaven.

The utterance is literally true and in accord with the laws of nature like all the utterances.  However each individual knew that "atum n" can stand even on cloudy days.  

Reality is highly complex and still the PT is in accordance with it.  It's individual perception and individual perspectives that can be out of whack.  

There is no “Ancient Language” as your alleged mutation is fictitious, it never happened. 
 

cormac

[cladking]

15 minutes ago, Trelane said:

So, he doesn't know what he's looking at let alone able to translate it? Shocking. 

Not that I am expertly versed in any ancient languages or texts or anything.

In terms of understanding the meaning of the rituals you are as good a translator as James P Allen.  

Somehow people seem to have forgotten the very meaning of "translation".  It means to take the meaning from one language and put it into another.  Allen has failed this.  Instead they have rendered the PT not in English so much as the "book of the dead".  The PT is about life and eternal life.  All the words are about life and living and means to live forever and Egyptology has murdered it by turning it into a book about death, dying, and the state of being dead.  

It's a shame really since it's great literature in its own right but even more because it tells us what it's like to directly experience consciousness.  It gives us insights about both our nature and the nature of humanity, life, and thinking.  It answers age old questions about the pyramids and their builders.  

Ancient people haven't merely had their graves desecrated by archaeology, they've had their very lives desecrated.   Their love, life, and reasons to live have been trampled into the shard rich land.  

 

[Thanos5150]

6 minutes ago, Antigonos said:

At least you owned it, bro.

Self responsibility. A novel concept. I must not be Homo omnisciencis. 

[cladking]

3 minutes ago, cladking said:

Their love, life, and reasons to live have been trampled into the shard rich land.  

Speaking of shard rich land here's another video that proves Egyptology is wrong about every single thing.  It also shows I'm wrong about at least one thing but Egyptology is wrong across the board.

 

[cladking]

23 minutes ago, cladking said:

534a. To say: Collar, beloved of Horus, good-looking, which is on the neck of Rē‘.

534b. If thou goest to heaven; so will N. go to heaven.

Collars going to heaven just make perfect sense to people today because we know these people were highly ignorant and superstitious.  Why wouldn't it be translated to say collars go to heaven when dead kings go?  This is all just superstitious gobbledty gook so when something is translated to say one should squish his toes in corpse drippings from an imaginary consciousness born mummified it seems to make perfect sense!!!!  

None of it makes any sense at all and Allen had to resort to an English "like" language because it does make no sense in any modern language.  It can't make any sense because Ancient Language is untranslatable.  When the the sun shines through the mist a rainbow appears which goes to heaven right along with the stones, pyramid, and dead king.  

This stuff is not complicated but if you believe in stinky footed bumpkins it is impossible.  Ancient people were not stupid, ignorant, superstitious, or sun addled.  They didn't think like us and didn't experience "thought" at all so had no words for it. 

It's all there in the "Rituals of Ascension"  we mistakenly call the Pyramid Texts.  

[Windowpane]

2 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

  #254 

Where do I say this is stated in the PTs?  Take your time.

In  #251 above, I explained how you - in (#1404 in the "Greatest Secret" thread) -  had said:

Quote

... what is clear from the Pyramid Texts (and other ancient sources) is that Osiris N (the deceased king) had to have his body re-assembled ...

You say that the statement is "clear from the Pyramid Texts."

So, to answer your question, #1404 is the place where you say "this is stated in the PTs."

[Scott Creighton]

30 minutes ago, Windowpane said:

In  #251 above, I explained how you - in (#1404 in the "Greatest Secret" thread) -  had said:

You say that the statement is "clear from the Pyramid Texts."

So, to answer your question, #1404 is the place where you say "this is stated in the PTs."

You know damn well what I mean in that statement.  And again - I do not state the term "Osiris N" is written in the pyramid texts. I use "Osiris N" in my sentence as simply meaning the 'deceased king' which everyone understands (I even explained it in brackets for those who may not have understood what Osiris N meant). I'm stating that the PTs tell us the body of each deceased king is re-assembled. That was the point of that statement so just quit muddying the waters.  I hope that's clear for you now.

SC 

[cormac mac airt]

20 hours ago, cladking said:

Perhaps someday it will be possible to show Otzi's brain lacked a broccas area that would strongly support my theory but until someone looks your objection is moot.  

Otzi’s brain was found relatively intact AND NORMAL. There is no evidence that he lacked a Broca’s Area. Your next fabrication is what? 
 

cormac