kavaris

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)

@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

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

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? )

(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

(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)

On 'Rewriting...' You're on to something. Keep going w/ it, as thats a subject matter no one has breached, and involves alot of forethought/work put into. Theres alot more moving parts, outside of memory, as you have active, instantaneous perceptions to consider, and memory is a bit odd, as its mostly a short term memory phenomenon, if you know what i mean; that is, the micro-cycles of our current situation (theres a whole wide range of cycles and circular phenomenon, through predicting the next thing thats gona happen, and things like this) they form in a fluid way that makes it "hard to see clearly", and have more going on then we are ever really considering~or conscious of~that would then pertain to your ability to consider things in the long term. And you can almost drop the term "memory" in place of this thing i would call "Cycles (cyclical) routines in general". p.s. that then gives you a much broader field of study to look @ You would still need the term memory for now, however if you can breach beyond cognitive science~you can get to a new field of study.

I forget wat year it was when smartphones appeared in movies, or wen we first seen the iphone, Alas do movies even make sense now, those based in todays era? i dont think so. Its like when you dream and you dont see computers or smartphones in your dream, like these are details that are detracting from the events themselves, even if they are apart of the events. Its like, our subject matters are thus always steeped in futurism~hopefully im using the right term. Look up futurism nd tell me if thats the right term. Anyway watayas think. Smartphones in movies — does it make sense? Consider that its just the beginning.

Ive been doing a quick side project on Dreams and how they are viewed by certain divine/mystical beliefs, theologies of our past (which obviously are religions that still exist, though i just refer to how ~ they are really trying to understand the importance of "tradition" /+ ancestors of the past), Christianity, Buddhism & Islam and others, whatever ones yous want to bring up too, go ahead... I believe theres something we need to understand here, not in regards to religion, as that's taken on a different meaning in the mod. day. I mean to talk about Dreams ~predominantly~ and tradition, and ancestors, as these are keywords i already mentioned. And you can refute that if yous wish, though i cannot imagine what/why you would want to be refuting. Presumably yous would want to introduce ideas on this topic / context~of theology + how dreams fit into the world-view https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_of_religion_and_dreams Quote - Dreams have been interpreted in many different ways from being a source of power to the capability of understanding and communicating with the dead. Traditional forms of societies considered dreams as portals to another world, a spirit world. These societies would even say they could gain most of their religious ideas from dreams. They could identify the sacred and gain access to sacred realms or portals to the supernatural. The contemporary 21st century has brought about a scientific materialism that can be detrimental to understanding the concept of dreams and how to interpret them. I would agree w/ whats being said on Science, but I would add that, understanding the act of, to dream, framing it like we do~or have done w/ the question, "What is reality/experience" - is the same w/ respect to the ques., "What does it mean to dream". Quote - Native Americans' belief of dreaming is similar to Buddhism v. that of common Western beliefs. Their view of dreams and dream interpretation looks similar to that of an interactive conversation. The conversation happens between them and the world. They are able to have this conversation because they don't see a difference between dreaming and waking reality (see later on the repurposed title "sleepless dreaming") but rather an overlapping experience. In this particular event in which they are overlapping worlds, they are able to open up their spiritual eyes to the visible and invisible, the audible and inaudible. The main idea of dreaming within this worldview is twofold: They look to gain a strong connection between them and the world, as well as enhance their self-knowledge and respect among their tribe. This is the case w/ Buddhism and Hinduism, w/ ideas like *sleepless dreaming, which is something akin to "the recognizing of dream as illusion", as well as being able to (through a certain Buddhist tradition) (there's that word again, "tradition") to maintain awareness during sleep. And from the perspective, we have Hinduism that initializes this idea/theory as an encapsulation through the three states that come from Advaita Vedanta: waking (jagrat), dreaming (svapna) and deep sleep (suṣupti). I like this idea of defining "sleepless dreaming" as "What reality is", because to me, thats what it is describing. Buddhism has its own term anyway, so you probably wont see the term "sleepless dreaming" in that context. That's from Wikipedia coming up with its own flawed Wikipedia language (more on this notion of reality=dream, what ive retitled a 'sleepless dream', to come) Christianity Quote - The belief of dreams tying with religious themes in the Western worldview was not something that was naturally intuitive. By having belief in these things, the Western culture would open their minds to a non-rational and imaginative force that opens up people's mind to understanding realism with evil and how one can have hope over it. Also, Pursuing dreams does not require God or gods and is why the Western culture receives this practice openly among their religious views and lifestyles. Thats an unusual way to phrase it, but i do agree nevertheless, as it gets at the heart of what i would want to say. But i would just say, Dreams are what *everything is, and understanding how to operate from a level thats concerned w/ *understanding everything~is a matter of repositioning the way you view everything currently. However, this doesnt say "What a DREAM is...", as thats actually a little different from saying "Everything is a dream". So ill let yous stew on that one for a little, to see what yous come up w/ p.s. And also, Science can refer to very innovative and positive things, but in the mod. realm/time, we arent really using it to refer to stuff like that. Its talking about political affairs, and yas know.. Quantifying, and qualifying reality through observations and experiments with the same things, over and over and over again. Islam Quote - The Muslim society believes different forms of dreaming can help people come into contact with past martyrs of their faith. Their purpose is to give the dreamer full understanding of the martyr's existence and implications towards the future. Different examples of how dreams can affect the future of Muslims include but are not limited to: showing a prosperous future, motivate them into moral or spiritual development and warning them of impending dangers. Decisions made by Muslims can be as important as deciding a future spouse can be determined through one particular dream. The ultimate purpose behind these dreams is to give the devout Muslim a deeper insight into the truth that is not available in waking reality. This isnt inherently a bad thing. Many NDE (near death experiences) ~though, mostly old/elderly people~ involves "seeing their family (possibly from the past)" ME -> I had an NDE, though i only ever saw a void-like, very bright, very white light, so i dont know what elderly drugs are required for the universal family-oriented experience and such... WTF!) So on its surface, i feel ancestry is a good thing. If muslims could tune into that, and go w/ a positive spin, and get rid of the idea of martyrs (they are just people arent they? they dont need to be viewed as martyrs, or rather, that is historical baggage being brought to a religious context that doesnt need to be brought w/ you into these realms of belief around religion, peace and harmony~which is suppose to be inherently peaceful, otherwise it is more like a strict doctrine of butthole) Then and only then youd have something positive / worth investigating. There is several aspects (in Islam) that go in this weird dir., not-even-enjoyable to follow stuff, and most of yous know this, or can feel it anyway. That is, Muslims gotta get rid of the pejorative wording and such that they like... Hooked on like their life depends on it. Think about it... Yall can make a new, flawless religion. Every religion was at one time "starting over". In the beginning, Christianity had to cobble together how many Jewish elements for their "texts"? Imagine Islam... In the beginning you had (im using the words they use in Christian circumstances) Scribes / priests, elders (or bishops, etc.) who were in a room, or a cave, or a garden, or a mountain~writing this stuff down, which was, what was to become canon to the bib 'el, the tor Ah, or the QueerAnne. If that step never happened, alls we would have is a bunch of scattered, eratic fragments from the queeranii caves ~XD or whatever it was called where they found the dead sea scrolls, et caetera. Lolol, Hey if any of yas read this far, yous can get a good laugh for the day. Anyway. Ive gone way off topic, but Hey, feel free to comment on religion too... Hey, just write. Fuck it. Let the words flow. Stop being scared. You literally have zero time in your lives to be scared of anything. HEEEeeeeey.