kavaris

Real quick i was tryina draw this analogy between these two areas of research, and how We might start from a sequence that better encapsulates the details ~by which we subsequently come to a conclusion that better reflects said encapsulation... And one thing to add to this is to say that, there is, once again, many different periods (within a reasonable window where Greek has been introduced) where Italy is speaking Greek, alongside Latin-esque languages. Alas this is an era that is after the eras im talking about when mentioning *earlier trade and interactions; As if youve read my stuff before, i talk about there being whats called "Early Pirate Language" (going back to the beginning) And then, another lineage called "Later Pirate Language", which is more related to Phoenician, and those latter-based pirate-based languages that people point out when doing research. But theres whats called "intermediaries" too, that which exist between Egyptian hieroglyphs and those languages to become Phoenician~The Mother tree, the subsequent latter eras that are to inspire ~all languages... The point to this is to say that, there isnt just one lineage of Egyptian-based languages (see "Sinai inscriptions"), and later Phoenician-based~ancient lingua-franca languages, that influence all of these languages in the beginning; As'it leads to the *Phoenician canon- that starts to derive geometrically-relevant languages to today, The Italic Runes and the Greek-canon, and the era before~when the phoenician lineages are interacting w/, as well as after , which is the era that im also *speaking on, when talking about them HAVING established some Phoenician-based language/writing, and the interactions during ~ Now going way back, there is also the Linear B script (see "Linear B") Because that is the syllable-based language from earlier in time, that which doesnt look anything like Greek; And which is one of many~of what yous might call *primitive languages or something, though its important for creating a timeline) P.s. Linear B is actually fascinating, and i still dont know what to make of it, as theres ALOT of these primitive intermediaries like this-that existed-but none of them are anything like Linear B, so wrap your head around that. P.s.s. Also keep in mind, if you look @ Greek from the perspective of the Celticwave (that being essentially composed of Scandanavians-to-be, Celts-to-be, Italians-to-be, etc) they are cork-screwing in from the tribal lands of Ukraine~Russia~round'about areas... landing somewhere in The Alps Region~ Austria-ish areas, but i forget at the moment the exact place where the oldest evidence of civilizations are found... The point being, these are to become all of Europeans. However, they are not natives, as they are encountering ACTUAL euro-natives, and killing off the men to reproduce w/ the women.... So, that Celticwave is to become the Northern Greeks, wherein they are ~like Greeks into Italy~ joining together w/ Turkeytribes/MiddleEstTribes @ Greece/Asia Minor, forming a slow but eventual pact, to acknowledge eachother & liv together, just as the Greeks do when they settle over in Italy So the Greeks are only part Pirate, technically..., but then again, the Scandinavians were a seafaring culture, and depending on how far back seafaring goes, and how influential that Celticwave was to Greece, it could be that they have two different early Pirate cultures coming together as one (to form Greece) though one of them would only be like, "Black sea" or "Caspian Sea" pirates, and the logistics on how they would even be related to this initial Celticwave, or more on the Turkeytribal wave, im not sure, as i suppose its hard to pull those threads apart anyway. ---- Edit: Something else ive been looking at... Ive been real into this Greek Font Society website, which atleast like 20 years old, and you can go to their publications site and find a bunch of free pdf's on the information around Greek typefaces and engravings and all sorts of interrelated history: https://greekfontsociety-gfs.gr/_assets/pdfs/greek_letters/KyleMcCarter.pdf That links you to a book called The Early Spread of the Greek Alphabet, and you can scroll down to the picture~As they demonstrates evolutions between different type (engravings) and how there is a long period of evolution that occurs between these letterforms, to even get to what we would even know&consider a Greek canon... That shows you jus how much time we're talking about, as even the Greek letterforms are taking years and years to develop out of Phoenician based script; ALas, that is a period of evolution that we must assume wouldve taken time. Linear B is quite different from these periods of engravings and such, and like i said; Iuno wat it is

If anyone is to do research on history and that critical year between the 1 BCE and 1st Century AD, youll likely come across Flavius Josephus. Hes got a very long, long story, and it has nothin to do w/ Jesus. I say that cause Jesus's name comes up next to his, though this is one of those things happening slightly offset from the crucifixions of the same vague years~give or take, and i think this story has alot more moving pieces, Alas you could write several TV shows just on the life and experiences of this guy, see for yourselves When we finally get to the point, an hour or so in, we see Josephus reflecting, right in the mid., of writing The Jewish War in Aramaic, intended for Jewish communities, and a Greek vers., shaped w/ Roman/Flavian audiences in mind; Tho only the Greek vers., survives. Then there's Book 20, Chapter 9, Section 1: Josephus describes the death of the high priest "Festus", and the power vacuum before his replacement "Albinus" arrived. The high priest Ananus (Annas II) took advantage of this gap in Roman oversight to convene a San'hedrin, and execute people he wanted gone. Josephus writes that Ananus brought before the Sanhedrin: "the brother of Jesus who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned" This execution of James (who we call the brother of "Jesus") is 62 AD by the deduction/offset ~ per the Josephus perspective, and this is corroborated by other sources like Eusebius and Hegesippus. Though im sure even this is debated, cause what isnt debated these days. So he's writing about events that happened roughly 30 years prior to himself. He himself would have been around 25–26 years old when James, the brother was executed. Josephus (age ~25-26) when James was executed in 62 AD, so then working backwards, Josephus would be born around 37 AD. But it doesnt tell us about the time from Jesus TO James, atleast if you're going solely from Josephus. Also, this is the same~w/ regards to what we learn from those later figures, Eusebius and Hegesippus, who say James, brother of Jesus was executed in 62 AD. We can then bring in Pontius Pilate's governorship (26–36 AD). Taking it at face value, the execution falls somewhere within 26–36 AD—although we still dont know bout Jesus—tradition thus far tells us theres a 29-32 year gap between the James and Jesus execution.

(part iv) in a perfect world, we would get ahold of that Mahdii character (the mahdii has appeared dude) cause hes not Jewish or doesnt consider himself to be~i dont think~So therefore theres no Bias on his part to be brutal... And to create a specialized group from out of his major following, who could work on figuring out all the history involved in Christianity, Judaism and Islam, in order to build up a *New picture of what i call "The scribes deriving scripture at the same time" -sortve thing, but doing so in a broader way, building a system of etymologies, and of like, logically produced epithets. An epithet is a descriptive word or phrase attached to, or substituted for a person's name that captures some defining quality. Or it could involve like "A World Tree of Diaspora Jew" & Muslim, et caetera.... some system that is considerate of how many changes there are, iuno... im sure they would figure it out, as hes got enough ppl to build like a cult following specifically for researching and adding / modulating. And they are all like, Super experts on his stuff im sure, so they jus need to take that dang broad worldview, and build like the "Charles Manson World Tree" lol i say that to be funny, cause ya know, cults can put some serious work in, lol, even if they end up goin in a dark direction (not that i think itll go in a bad direction, but hey, thats wat im sure everyone thought before X cult became wat they were... im speaking to all cults in general of course xD)

(part iii) And so the larger idea we could say ~temporarily~ is that, you come across a lot of rabbis and jews today, some Russian Jews, some Jews from all of the various middle eastern countries, some jews who had returned to israel, some jews in Europe, or in Greece, Turkey, Georgia, or that are East / North of the caspian sea. Some Jews in Egypt, some Jews in Northern Africa, S. Amer., N. Amer., the point being its like, the whole world has little pockets of jewish families from entirely different branches, before the word Jew/Jewish existed, and certainly before the Medieval era when Hebrew started to be shaped into what it is now. Returning to Paul... Scholars placed the life of Paul in 5–15 AD for his birth, and his death around 62–68 AD, most likely in Rome. His active missionary career runs approximately 47–62 AD. The Gallio Inscription is a fixed date in the Pauline chronology ~Gallio~ who was the Roman proconsul of Achaia (Greece), and..... Acts 18 describes Paul being brought before him in Corinth. An inscription found at Delphi independently dates Gallio's tenure to around 51–52 AD. The Roman historian Suetonius mentions Emperor Claudius expelling Jews from Rome, which Acts also references. That's independently dateable to around 49 AD Paul has a couple important biblical passages, but ill let the bible scholars riff on that whole front. Anyway, lets come back to it wen we know more on Paul (P.s. Im not sure wat to make of the bible parts assoc. w/ Paul, so if yous wanna bring them into the fold, go ahead... I just dont want to use the bibles exact wording to give rise to our ideas, as theres no telling where that would lead us, probably down shits creek. Rather, well find *Other Landmarks to match PAUL TO~Working on Paul-the otherway around essentially)

(part ii) anyway, letts call that a totem/pillar, a sortve landmark that we have established on Paul. Now we can investigate paul without any of the scholarly generalizations around it, and locate and describe "Who is what", as each era can be wholly unique. Also we have to consider the Greek language in all of this, which is to say then that, during the development of these proto-languages, they are using Greek to base said writings (eras of Proto languages they call hebrew... they call everything hebrew) We have to be careful here, cause many of this stuff is a trap, that is, not just a trap around scholarly/mainstram views on jewish religion and greek being distilled into "this one little moment in time" (same thing they do to Greek, though its usually from scholars missing or ignoring a large majority of Greek history, and how it is utilized by non-native Greeks, etc) we also have to avoid these narratives that theres no evidence for, or that have been conflated together... Now some things jus "make sense". If something from history just makes sense, then it makes sense and we should be thinking of history from terms that make sense. Let me give yous an example: Scholars ~And even many experts try to say the Latin lineages, or that the majority that relates to the eventual Latin (and i presume all of them from italy in their minds) that it all comes directly from Greek. We know for a fact that Italy is settled by Greeks, who in turn, invite Italic, Etruscan, etc, etc people into their settlements to start a community. As the years go by, many of these tribes are taught Greek, alongside their tribal tongue... But this is YEARS after there had been Italian and Greek tribal interactions. So heres the question; if Greeks interacted with pre- Italian ppl years before this colonization, in order to influence each others language, why did italians have their own language? Why wouldnt the Greeks have just turned them all on to their system? That is, why wouldnt they have just been using Greek? That is, they already had an alphabet, granted it may not have been A B C D E F G.... it mightve been a barbaric vers., plus ordering, but its like saying Greek generated all runic inscriptions, however we see Celtic inscriptions without any runes, And that is a tradition that doesnt rely on this obvious A B C D E F G.... In other words, those pre Germanic, Celtic & Italian tribes , et caetera, they have a long history, and they got their language in the same way Greeks got their language, through interactions with the broader world, and through trade, and this goes back to years where very geometrically simple pirate languages exist: Someone just turned me onto a North African Berber language/writing system (it began w/ a /t/) And, i'd never seen it before last night... That language is an example, of the MANY, many, many languages there were, and how they have potential to play apart in this million-piece puzzle. p.s. round about the same time Greeks came to Italy is actually round bout when we start to see an Alphabet, so i wouldnt be surprised if "Ordering each letter" was an idea traded to Greeks, but we dont have evidence for that, so lets not jump ahead til we know for sure... And i jus bring this all up, so that when we dive into Paul and related areas of history, that we have the most logical answers / foundation established.

I will, now that youve brought him up... Let me see what i can find about him, as far as intrestin stuff. Paul is a very intetesting character, and it gives rise to all of are conception round Christianity. Lets begin w a baseline for now (and theres a few more chunks of history on him in part iii of the following posts) Saul of Tarsus was his full name. Tarsus was a major Hellenistic city in Cilicia (modern southern Turkey/Asia minor Greece), which means he grew up steeped in Greek philosophy, rhetoric, and culture. He wrote in sophisticated Greek — not the koine of a fisherman, but the prose of an educated cosmopolitan. He was simultaneously a diaspora Jew (a jew livin outside the ancestral homeland) and a Roman citizen — a rare and privileged combination. Theres alot of death & destruction around what we might call the earliest *Paul years, or later capitulation ~ surrenderings... that which lead to the Paul who can read + write essentially Theres the Roman destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Temple in 70 AD, right around when Paul's letters were circulating and the Gospels were starting to be written. Another major Jewish revolt was crushed in 135 AD and Jews were formally banned from Jerusalem entirely. This essentially ended Judea as a Jewish homeland for nearly two millennia and pushed the remaining population fully into diaspora existence. If we rewind and go back, the following events sortve cause scholars to want to bring thes latter terms like, Jewish and Hebrew, into contexts where, in order to describe the same people, youd have to draw a direct connection, however.. one issue w this is how many times these so called tribes are relocated / displaced throughout history, so theres different tribes in different eras, Hebrew looking nothing like it did just 50 years ago... Not to mention theres gona be Jews everywhere on Earth, independently believing their era of ancestral religion to be of a common era of language, and so forth... but let me rewind... The Assyrian Conquest (722 BC) The northern kingdom of Israel (722 era israel) was conquered and a large portion of the population was deported into Assyria. These are the famous "ten lost tribes." Many of those communities never returned and dispersed further over generations. The Babylonian Exile (597–539 BC) The southern kingdom of Judah was conquered by Nebuchadnezzar. The elite, the priests, the skilled — were forcibly relocated to Babylon. This is a hugely formative era for Judaism as a religion. Jewish identity had to be renegotiated around Torah and practice rather than a physical temple. When the Persians under Cyrus conquered Babylon and allowed Jews to return, many did — but a significant number simply stayed. They had built lives, businesses, communities in Babylon. So even the "restoration" left large populations outside the homeland voluntarily.

This is hard to explain, so plx bear w/ me, as it involves two separate roads; Alas we are going to be walking upon two separate roads, simultaneously, and you need to understand it from the present-future moment perspective. From the present-future moment, one can look into the past, the present or the future. And when looking into the past, we dont mean to invoke God, because, to invoke God is to speak upon the coincidences, the chance encounters, *fate in general, fortunate situations, and serendipity of the future (or within the present) though granted, the present is an abstract and complex idea in itself... Anything that speaks of the present-future circumstances is Not the past. Thats just a matter of differentiating, as we could just as well say that "everything is one, thus no distinctions exist" and be done w/ it from then on~let it go. However, in this case, the past is an entirely separate field, as it starts from the present, pointing backwards into a memory, a memory of a memory. It is that which transcends the "real", as we arent speaking to the real moment. The purpose is to invoke that spirit or memory that we have, and to share it, or to experience it ~ \*through the real, and thus we are Not talking about a direct experience w/ God whilst in the present-past moment. That leads us to a bigger idea which involves "searching for truth" contra to "the istemi to" (i explain this as we go, and will be explaining "-istemi" in ALL of my posts, as its the ultimate on the topic of spirituality) What is God? You may ask that question. Is it not an *intention, introspection into some reflection of the Divine nature of the universe, that which requires \*us to unlock ourselves? Theres decisions happening when you are on "the road", the multiple roads "you COULD HAVE chosen". THat is to say then that, God cannot be with you on a road you havent decided on... God cannot lean towards the left if you are leaning towards the right. God cannot be invoked if you literally MUST disconnect from God/Source, in order to explore the left, or the right. When you choose a road, you allowing the Divine~or the concept of God, you allow it to exist. God is not something that can exist without being invited, because we have freewill. THat is to say then that, the notion of God (the conceptual notion of) is not a "one size fits all", though we mean (try as we might) to experiment and explain what that idea of God is~As when we speak of *It w/ the capital /i/, we are speaking to ourselves, no matter what. When it comes to the one-way-trip, that is the entrance into a road-decided theres alot going on there that we could talk about. Im only speaking to the general notion of, and how God is a conceptual piece of something *within God, *It or /i/ with a capital /i/, it is sortve is like a hologram, or one of those things that are like a reflection of something else. So returning to the "one-way-trip", the (***) path-decided on — If we speak of God in the pejorative, conflating Satan and God together, then we might be mixing everything up, making it very hard to explain other things. Everything starts from a belief in something. It doesnt matter if its religion, or some other idea (however, it doesnt start/end w/ it...) The road you choose is the act of shutting out the road Not chosen. The Light you believe in is not the same light that follows everyone... but try as we might we might hope to explain it. note: i had alot more i was gonna say, but i have a doctors appt. For now, this is more of a roughdraft / or intro towards~what will be a better explanation later.

I assumed yous would actually look up 'who jospehus flavius'~as thats a good place to start to be able to start (thats not the name he was born w/ and its a title he took on later...) And on the topic of pirating, since i brought that up ~ Yas gotta realize that pirating was a lucrative gig, so ppl would been joining it in order to make a living, granted theres different eras of maritime trade. Maybe i have to teach yous about what all the different categories are in the realm of learning and teaching and such... As someone asked if "my goal had anything to do w/ the present moment". However, just in general you want to be specific. Saying "Im confused about everything" or "is this about something that its not about at all" isnt a good place to start, in order to be taken seriously in the world, so heres a list of what everything falls under... 1. Humanities (human meaning): History, Literature, Philosophy, Religion (Language as well, on the interpretive side) note: "Language"-is not only symbolic and interpretative, etc., but its primary~as well as having itself listed as "a requirement" for everything here, so its one of those things that gets "taken for granted" even though you have to learn it~even on a minor level, in order to be able to do or study anything else 2. Trivium/Quadrivium: Trivium (fundamentals, clear thinking): Which has sub genres: "Grammar", "Logic" (also called dialectic), "Rhetoric" — expressing ideas effectively;; Quadrivium: "Arithmetic" — number itself (or the theory therein), "Geometry" — number in space, "Music" — number in time (not just art—but patterns, ratios, harmony, et caetera), "Astronomy" — number in space and time 3. Formal/Conceptual Sciences (pure structure... starts to blend into *applied sciences): Mathematics, Logic, Theoretical Sciences, et caetera 4. Natural Sciences (physical reality): Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Astronomy, Earth science 5. Social Sciences (human systems), Humans (scientifically treated), et caetera, Psychology, Sociology, Economics, Political science, Anthropology. This is about human behavior and organization. I tried to go in order, starting from the categories of history to the modern era, as the modern era has begun to mix things up, in that its not circling back and teaching things in the way they use to be taught. Its not your fault, its the schools & universities job to teach these things, and the direction modern teaching has decided to go has been abysmal. Rather then make a new thread, i just thought we'd continue here, as ive made lots of threads, and it doesnt speak to anyone getting a better understanding, or being able to understand things better. I think things have actually gotten less of an understanding and normal response via the spectrum of specificity and attention-to-detail on my part. Its also why im less likely to return, or try to respond to anyones ques., and just go about my business addressing issues here & there.

it has nothing to do w the present. it clearly doesnt lol p.s. you havent read or shift3d to the topic im speaking on. The title has the word "history" in it.

Whats your conclusion? Ya left a cliffhanger here, and i wasnt sure where the first point went. That is, you processed it, and you ran the data... You followed it to the correct conclusion. What was your summary/conclusion there, as i felt you were on the right path and then it went onto a diff topic? I see some of your minor points were resolved, but you dont have (or are missing, as its hard to decipher) a broader conclusion.

(part ii) i just wanna add this last conclusion and summary to sortve broaden wat i mean here. Its terribly distracting to realize that the history of Hebrew makes no sense when you are tryina do research—Like its being used to generalize, in the same way Phoenician & PIE are used to generalize, and likely others too I mean, it doesnt help us to understand Hebrew is what im sayin, as according to~you can take any era of Phoencian and call it "Lalalala-lalalala", without any consideration within the two thousand years that have existed in between... Also Runic Italic/Latin isnt a direct descendent of Greek, but rather is essentially collolaborative in nature, as it doesnt develop after, but alongside, just without the advanced and organized foundations, like Runic Italic is falling upon those to be~of the Italy-Germanic Runic half, who are still not entirely organized by the time Greece gets their sht together. And then, Greeks (after Linear B, after that got their sht together, seeing as they were a bunch of pirates, like Phoenicians) at which point they then come to Italy, and they create a society, inviting Etruscans, Italic ppl, etc., and although there are still going to be battles nd such, per the eras where battles were how u solved issues, it is still an example of how Runic Italic collabs w/ Greece, and so, that is to say, we dont need to think too hard bout the fact that italic and Greek wouldve been collabing at a couple points in their history. Like its also frustration when ppl still think Runic Italic/Latin lineage is a direct relative of Greek ~ Like, thats not how it works. Thats not how Later Pirate Language influences the world, by jus visiting this one, tiny area over and over. It has multiple levels of influences in the mediterranean and beyond (effecting every language) (🇮🇹 p.s. i call the Greeks pirates (which i feel is a compliment), but im not sure u would call the Italic/Celtic wave a pirate lineage yet, atleast at this point, cause they are coming into Europea from the northish, and thus are more land-based, atleast during this era, but hey, its very possible they wrapped around, evolving into sailors, as the Greeks essentially wrapped around, settling &becoming *New landlubbers, Neapoli, sortve like orthogonal opposites... or two antipodal points or something)

A Rant Another issue is scholars and their "system of collecting garbage"... i.e., what is called Paleo-Hebrew and Proto-Indo-European, as they are both these literal garbage buckets for placeholder letter/words and script-assoc., that literally do not help us in any way, shape or form, especially understanding Hebrew, as it make no sense... like ... for a scholar, if you see anything that looks like Phoenician, you just call it Hebrew XD, cause thats what many of the experts will do. And like, It doesnt matter what era, or what location or what culture may have used it at the time... "In two thousand years its gonna become Hebrew, Duh... It doesnt matter if they we're waiting until the Renaissance to see the language come to fruition". Like, they mine as well walk around and point at things and say "Hebrew here", "Hebrew there". What im sayin is, there are So many lineages of What i call "EP" or Early/Later Stage Pirate script" (which is not even including intermediaries between the hieroglyphics and what is to become later stage pirate lang, or phoenician), and considering how theres so many things written in Ancient Greek, yet, somehow, the most significant text in history was written in the rarest language for that time, before Ancient Greek?... What are the chances of something like that happening. Im pretty sure its almost near zero. I mean, i don t have a crystal.ball as i dont know how many people there were writing texts on the topic, but to me it sounds like our history has been heavily fractured and filled w a bunch of scholars throwing garbage in places it shouldnt be, or they are really just like, incredibly hard headed. Like, the common view on these things is being scewed by writers, researchers and scholars who wanna think that hebrew was a bigger deal than it was, like its not til 10th Century AD, getting into later stage medieval period that its brought back, like... people have no idea the bs they are being fed~Granted that doesnt mean theres nothing there or that it doesnt deserve as much attention now. "Now" is a totally different time in history. "Now" is the present moment, the period we all know. But "Now" isnt our *Ancient history, like, we want to preserve ancient history, right? We want to do history justice.

The book he says tiowards the end is something like, Book: al-Haft al-Sharif, by Imam Hasan al-Khalaf al-Salih Like, "Alhaf[t]e Al'Shariif", and upon searching it up i do see this (in English) https://www.kandokav.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Al-Haft-Al-Shareef_Englisch.pdf Granted, i am not an expert on arabic, so there could be some nuance in the author/title that im not hearing correctly. I believe the book is like the Corpus Hermeticum in that its suppose to be like a conversation between two~one who speaks, the other being the questioner, or an individual speaking/asking ques., to God rather (which is a really direct way of expressing faith/religion, its like, just give us the collected exp., w/ god, right? lol iuno its kindve funny in retrospect)

Although i believe religions should rebase theirselves on Egyptian belief and Hermeticism to build upon the nuances of some of these mystical ques., this Madhi figure... Hes appeared, ir so he tells us Anyway, Madhi has some interestn sht (i forget is real name. Search mahdi on actualized as ive posted his bio before on here) Edit: n/m i looked it up again, its Abdullah Hashem Aba al-Sadiq, or so it comes up as

@mods (Redirect request) Feel free to relocate this to the political/geographic spectrum/section~As i didnt know what it was gonna be on, i thought it was going in a spiritual, or mystical direction at first Edit: n/m its going into a more lighthearted dir., around 19-20:00, so scratch that i think x D

The other day i went to an Asian mart nd bought a thing w/ fresh leaved Ti guan yin in it, which is a type of Oolong that has this characteristic bright node to it, like ppl often compare it to a chinese spa, though theres so many Oolongs, and many different kinds of each strain/cultivar of oolong. Long story short, i was thinkin bout how tea energizes you, especially ti guan yin and things like this, And if you look and smell fresh tea leaves, itthey look resinous. Like, has anyone tried cross breeding tea w/ somethin else to give birth to a tea strain that gets you high? Like, i rememver thinkin the same thing in regards to Salvia divinorum, like, is there a way to get closser to something that has layers to it. Cause i feel like 100,000 years ago or whatever, marijuana was bread to be atleast somewhat more interesting, and then look what happened. We took it and made it 100x more than what it was, which weve done with other things as well: I wana say broccoli or one of these thing. To me, tea has that potential to be mated with something, or atleast some sortve tea-like plant. Iuno. I was jus thinkin wat kinds of crazy stuff could i post in psychedelics. Psychedelic tea would be pretty cool, instead of having to add stuff into tea.

Iuno why, i keep tryina post these LandofChem videos, but they refuse to embed. But anyway, the most latest LandofChem video is interesting. Somewhere around 20:00-30:00 he mentions somethin bout hydraulic / mechanical tech, though to me, hydraulic seems like a super advanced/techy idea for primitive civilizations. Like I dont know why these mechanical engineers (im assuming he has friends who are mechanical engineers) Like, Why they arent investigating non-modern tech, like im talkin swings & pulley systems like the stuff they taught us back in 4th grade science class. Counter-weight machines. Iuno, but still, its LandofChem who's investigating some cutting edge sht. I mean, there is evidence for things involving like, "windup" mechanisms ~swings & pulleys~ already, so thats not an unfounded approach/idea of mine (im sure others~someone out there -is investigating it from like reasonable positions too, as far as "how it was built" is concerned (maybe they dont even teach that stuff in science anymore, as i am jus assuming everyone knows what im talking about). The other issue is like, could you do everything you would need to do using primitive tech, i dont know. Its all conjecture. No one knows how any of it was done still, so thats all we *can do... Anyway, heres the link to the video atleast.. https://youtu.be/Q5V42kelTic?si=lGKGUc3uG0uGH2y_ Edit: oh, later in the video, or says he'll post a link in the description of his video, detailing what he means by *hydraulic system, as its referring to the *water-containment system ~or something akin to~ which plays into his whole things about the pyramids function (.. i guess water-pressure is a kind of hydraulic system/machinery->i dont know, im not a mechanical engineer. Wait, is " hydra-lic' " always water based? Whats it called if its hydraulic ~via~ air-density-based or helium-based nd stuff? Isnt that also hydraulic? )

Since we brought up the pyramids, i figured, hey, why not, lets get into the lost labyrinth now, as its the next upcoming adventure into the word of egypt and its sites (see my map, as ill jus repost it here in codeblock form). I found a video from ~11 hours ago, ero, its not like its old, vecchio news. Its something they are currently working on. Plus, I believe she talks about what the labyrinth is. p.s. every site i mapped out has, by virtue of its constructions and etchings, is just like, very very strange, and the deeper you go the stranger it gets (N) ^^^^(Mediterranean Sea)^^^^^^Canaan aka Israel ↗ Assyrian conquest ~722 BCE Aramaic becomes dominant in Israel region ↖ Alexandria | Nile (flows N to S) Land of Onias / East of Nile | Heliopolis ↙ ~30 km from Cairo Giza Plateau / Cairo ~110 km from the Red Sea (Pyramids & Sphinx & Memphis, old capital) | Hawara ~75 km ↖ (from Memphis) (Labyrinth / Faiyum) Akhenatens Cty ~200 km | ↓ 2,000 km ↑ | N to S ^^^(Nile, cont.)^^^ @ ^^^(Red Sea)^^^ | ← 250 km from river to sea @median → ~580 km | ~100 km from Abydos (Osireion) to Dendera Dendera (Oh'Hathor, Temple in Denderus) ~60 km \ Thebes (Luxor & Karnak) ~100 km | Edfu (Temple of Horus) ~160 km / Aswan ~75 km | Nubia (Sudan) ~

(cont.) The only thing i worry bout is, like say we are All in an *End of the world scenario, and we are on an island w/ foreign belief systems, like a grab bag of judainism, islamic ppl, like christian and or related, etc, etc, and suppose theres a life or death situation, And everything stems on the fact that iuno. Say for instance we need them to go out and kill a Sacred cow (to me, i could see how cows & cattle are sacred, u kno, but in a life or death scenario u gota do wat u gota do for the greater good of the ppl) Now if they are like "Oh i dont eat cow or pig on Ramadan.. im not gonna kill them while you build the boat" or something (suppose only i kno how to build the boat or sumthin), or if the christian guy is like, "i dont cut down trees as i was part of the Tree Relief program back on Amer.", ima be like, *What is the bs!? Yous are literally useless to our survival. Like if anything, the ultimate belief system should be,"Dont stagger us to death, and pull out the carpet of survival on us".. Like if everyone on the imaginary desert island is like, "I Wana live", then atleast give us a heads up if we are to shift into death mode, so everyone can be mentally prepared in advance to go full death in mind. Speaking of which, its startin to get hotter outer now, hotter than desert death so be prepd for that.

(part ii) heres another good one. Back when these Jewish traditions were forming into what eventually takes shape into christianity canon, you had all these different ideas for what was meant by "Jesus" & "The Christ"... And "God"... Are they the same person? Are they all God? et caetera... So this is just two that are similar, but theres literally like twenty of these groups and questions regarding this same topic: Cause on one hand you had Arianism, which yous can check out ^... You also had Cerinthianism (who were called Cerinthians, cause it was based on Cerinthius, ~late 1st century AD ...) Ill let yous like up those two, cause they are both quite different. They do not just blindly accept "Jesus, God... the holy spirit.." Like, to them, making the distinction of what constitutes these things is critical! And rightly so, you know, like these ppl are super smart, intuitive... They were thinkin bout this stuff, religiously, literally, right? i mean, their whole worldview depending on it~And whats interesting is that, they are in~in some sense~taking direct control, or attempting to, in to what would be the "traditions to come" for Rome, and the world, as i see the Romans and these early Jewish sects as being on the heel of a somewhat traditionless side of our history, very much like modern America~Granted we had years of Christianity, but its like, Today you can believe in anything. Like you arent limited to anything, hence, traditionless children; Identical to Early Roman Empires. *p.s. i chose two beliefs/figures that are somewhat similar in challenging the whole structure to get yous thinking, as its actually sortve tough to work out what each of them are about, given that, on the surface they have things in common. Theres so many figures that are present during the first 300 years or so of this like, early debate on what the *seed of the aspects to christianity are, and that seed of heresy has so many fkin figures, its like, thats a deep rabbit hole yous can go down (its almost neverending figures~one could pull up, like... iuno where they keep coming from; Same w/ Greece, but theres like 100,000x figures~which is part of the story of the Roman Emp.) p.s.s. also this is sortve random, but (Ce)rinthians, (Co)rinthia, and (Ca)rinthia, are all different things, the last two being a places, Co- in Greece, Ca- in Austria. Theres also Corinthians from the bible~Which is itself Paul's letters, written to the Christian community he founded in the city of Corinth-, Greece.

Yes. ha. Exactly. Also, Hey, im glad i could introduce you to someone new as well. He... Oh heres a video that brings up Josephus in the beginning, as i have recently just did a writing on laws, traditions, beliefs, and the Last Jewish Heritage, &into Roman ppl/beliefs Josephus is considered a really great ref., or window into tribes in and around Israel; I of course had focused on their heritage, traditions & beliefs (theres over 30 tribes in that area) And i bring this up to build upon the notion of them \*being much more organized then others might not know or realize at first sight... This writing ive been doing on Philosophy and similar things within the Greek world ~ It starts to blend into the Ancient Israel tribes and beliefs around nature and civilization, mirroring the same rules/laws and such that they reiterated (im of course speaking to, "on nature" beliefs, or "words to live by" for your people, like "how your people should live") Those types of things. They are almost identical, atleast at the time in Greece and the area in and around Israel. Im still watching the video, so i dont know if he gets into such things (but i assume he does), where as the writing i was doing was to show the parallels between Greek Philosophy (of Plato, The Stoics, et caetera) and the last Ancient Jewish traditions/philosophy~Of course, the Jewish people would have said it using their own words for it (unless they had gone to school in Greece or something), but what we often have to do, is to use known words like "democracy" that are originally from Greek, and we use that to draw parallels to ideas like that of Jews, though, they of course wouldve used their own words & terms for such things and ideas. (Greeks did take over at points in history, but thats a diff topic of course). Anyway, the video seems to add/expand on some interesting details, which are interesting. note, just to give you an idea of how many tribes there are, there's the following tribes (attempting to go in order from oldest, like a thousand BC to newest, 2nd CE), like the tribe of reuben, tribe of Levi, Dan, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Ephraim, Manasseh, Benjamin, Naphtali, Machir, Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Therapeutae, Zealots, Sicarii, Herodians, Samaritans, Nazarenes, Elcasaites, Marcionites, Valentinians, Sethians, Mandaeans, Ha-Derekh, Cerinthians, Carpocratians (iuno why, i feel like theres more listed in the bible and the torah) Granted you might be more interested in the Roman/German side of things in Europe (or the Mystical Theology/Hermeticism side of things), though i meant to hint at the interesting stuff going on in the middle east at-the-time / parallel to this stuff

So i have yous started w/ maybe the best introduction to Philosophy imagineable lol (thats me being pontifical) In any case, now i want to go down the rabbit hole, to get to something that specifically treads upon Philosophy itself, and i found this perfect compendium of sorts, the deluxe edition of The Story on Philosophy, which is a multi-volume compilation of Books on such matters, by Will Durant (note, this is only one direction, the boy band~into philosophy, as i know how many directions one could go) I wont go into who he is, or much of whats going on (as its really like a "walkthrough of history") BUT thats actually germane to the, call it, a partridge in a bevy of other partridges up in their pear trees, as it gets to the bottomline of what i want to say right now~The hard-boiled philosophical questions. And that is @20:00-21:00 somewhere around there he brings up "The Sophists"; He calls them "traveling teachers of wisdom", who looked within, and upon their own thought and nature, rather than looking out upon the world of things. He also brings up Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) who wasnt a Sophist, because hes drawing an analogy between debates v. modern thinkers. Anyway, im getting off topic describing what he says, as yous can listen to it for yourselves (listen to it a hundred times, thats why its there). Here's the point i want to graze: The Sophists, and how they were divided into two "groups of thought"... ... Before i lay them out, lets first turn it into two bulletpoints (bp), so yous can see them clearly, because its a really good point, and one that we might want to dwell on, specially if only to refer back to~that is~until getting to the bottom of the sea, so to speak (And feel free to speak freely and naturally on the following; Oh and also, it is likely necessary to reinsert women into this conversation of course _, as im quoting Ancient periods, " as is ") ** One side said — "Nature is good... And civilization is bad... By nature, all men are equal, becoming unequal only by class-made institutions; And that law is an invention of the strong to chain and rule the weak" ** The other side said — "Nature is Beyond good & evil... That, by nature, all men are unequal; And that morality is an invention of the weak to limit and deter the strong. Power is the supreme virtue and desire of man. And that, of all forms of government, the most wise and natural is Aristocracy. Theres a middle ground to unity~when it comes to nature & civilization, isnt there? (And this is a question i will come back to). Because, as yous know, many things can divide us, and so we must ask, What can thus unite us? In some sense, both sides are wrong because they're starting from a shallow idea of nature. What is Oligarchy? The consolidation of power by a dominant minority, whether religious or ethnic, can be considered a form of oligarchy — And thats probably what we're hearing from that last side. However yous should notice how we are still arguing about the same thing to this day "... by nature, all men are unequal", arent we arguing about having equal rights today? Female + male groups together in sports and stuff... How many things are changing because of this fundamental issue? But taking a closer look, youll see we are still harping on the same problem still, missing the important details in the process. And thats not to dismiss the 19th CE.. or the 20th CE... (the second point is likely someone in Athens~during~within the oligarchy, as it wasnt made clear to me who was suppose to be speaking during that line/passage) So, What do yous think?... (?) I'd like to know your opinion. I'll reiterate & rephrase the question at the end, so dont worry. Know the middle ground, or the Plato route is to put aside both extremes and just ask about the current society or civilization directly, "Does this society help the soul? And in becoming ordered and just?” Plato emphasizes similar things (in Republic), where he says that "people are unequal by nature", though this is not in the crude sense of "strong dominate weak". He means that people have different natural aptitudes, and some are suited to rule (philosophers), others to defend, others to produce, et caetera (thats how it should be, clearly, otherwise... straight butthole.. like we are living in) When it says "Nature is beyond good & evil", he's not wrong. Nature doesnt go by the morality play; But it also doesnt really have a voice, or a means of communicating. It also depends on what we mean by "nature" of course. We dont know what nature is saying or doing is my point. Nature is nature. or explicitly said, it could be, nature = rational structure of the soul civilization = something that should cultivate that structure But "nature", however we may define it, is surely "beyond good or evil", or what we would consider. The passage about "morality being an invention of the weak" isnt a good idea to have, as it then implies "... not having any morality applied~equal to youre own opinion/life", given that its from weak men, of which our speaker would likely go on to say, he is a strong man (presumably, and in the most extreme case) And in fact, im sure that he would concur that " 'to live' is to accept / participate in the underlying morality play". Cause i mean, otherwise, anyone can justify immoral acts (without morality) or as according to this vainglorious individual, assuming he were to go full retraction on morality, because, it is for this same reason that he himself would justify his own immoral acts to others through this paradigm. Or in other words, to downgrade the morality play, is to invite "immoral" acts into your own play/scene); In conclusion, it is yet another case of this "nestle / fledgling of overconfidence" taking flight, about something he doesnt truly understand at the time. And nor should he/they, given the time they had lived in. Looking back now @ Ancient Athens, the oligarchy had denounced democracy as an incompetent sham. Just to give yous a brief summary, in Athens, power was first held by the aristocrats, the city's noble families. These were people born into respected lineages (royalty), often owning land. Also, political authority was concentrated into their hands. Being *best meant being virtuous and well-born, not just rich, and most ordinary citizens had little say in public affairs. Over time though, wealth began to matter more than birth. Rich citizens could dominate politics even if they weren't from the old noble families. Aristotle called this shift oligarchy, the corruption of aristocracy, because the city was no longer governed by the virtuous elite but by those with the most money. Aristocracy = “rule by the best” (the virtuous or capable few) Oligarchy = “rule by the rich” (a corruption of aristocracy, when wealth, not virtue, determines who governs) ^ As Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as meaning "rule by the rich", contrasting it w/ aristocracy, arguing that oligarchy was a corruption of aristocracy. In conclusion, and as you will hear in the video, there was not much democracy going around for them to be denouncing ~ given that there was only small percentage of "free men" in Athens (the rest, slaves and such) and the point being, its not that different from today, as yous know, and its just a slightly different version of what happened in these Ancient times in Athens. Q: Now If i could leave yous with one question, it would be going back to the two bp: What is the meaning of nature or what makes "nature and civilization" united, and the civilians of that civilization united? *p.s. Enjoy the video, as its 5 hours long, and full of interesting stuff. p.s.s. i did a whole thing on *royal families and unifying the world politically*, but considering how it doesnt really touch on Philosophy (not directly), it would probably confuse everyone. but if yous are ever curious, or if yous ever want to know something on similar topics~on things like Germany/Austria, Italy/Rome, Greece, Philosophy, Mythology and such, just ask

In the journey towards understanding things like "Mythology" and "Philosophy", the first part to this would ~in the best case scenarios~learning about "Philo", "Sophy", and who the "Sophists" were, to sortve preface w/, what is to be — a journey towards history and the right way to initialize or investigate such a name in the first place. Does that make sense to yous? And do yous agree? i think so. Lets get it. p.s. If anything, it is just a means~by which we can get everyone started looking at Greek again, as its like, theres so much there, and so many ideas to be explored. And theres also things that we dont all fully understand, as far as them having evolved so extraordinarily over the years (its only been 2+ millennium, ya know?)

(part2) i jus want to add something to what i was saying... As far as memory is concerned, you also have elements in Nature remembering things, that is, DnA is able to remember, and you have these elements that come back, "reminding" the person or persons... So for instance, theres whas called atavism where an ancestral genetic trait reappears after having been lost through evolutionary change in previous generations. So the point is like, theres two different things, theres this fundamental memory that exists in all things, which geets down to the knitty grityy DnA, then theres whats going on from the very first point of perception, prior to the ability to form memories, and that is itself an important stance, cause it speaks to out first hand experience of building those memories (I dont know what you would consider nature, but you could just call it, first hand human perception vs. nature or something)