The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby comingfrom » Sun Apr 23, 2017 5:34 pm

Thank you, GreyCloud.

The Abrahamic god isn't thought of as a planet.
I put Him as an example of a God having gender.

Brahman, Tao and Nirvana are gender neutral and beyond gods.
A god is whatever you worship.
Many people today rather worship atheistic concepts.
I also know a man whose god is Beer.

Brahma is the Father (Vishnu is the Son, and Shiva is the Holy Ghost).
The Tao is the Son (God's power on Earth).
Nirvana is a state of being (equivalent to being in heaven).

Well, according to the myths ;) .

Earth is not a dot in the sky (from our perspective).
I gave Earth as an example of a planet which gets given gender even today.

The Earth, Moon and Venus have always been female in the eyes of man.
The Sun, Mercury, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn have always been depicted male.

Example(s) please of Venus' 'terrible aspect and raining destruction.
Medusa.

What time was that? What evidence do you have that the periodicities were not known?
The myths were already extant by the time of the first know record of peridicities.

I am going on Velikovsky and Talbot's word here.

Evidence please.
Talbot again.

More planets and moons were not discovered until the mediaeval period, surely?
Correct.
By the invention of the telescope.

~Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:15 am

@comingfrom,
You replied:
In her terrible aspect, Venus rained terrible destruction upon the world, according to the myths.
Logically, such destruction couldn't come from the Milky Way.

If you need catastrophic forces in your hypothesis, you of course focus on these in order to build up your theory of "ancient planetary disasters". But what about the benign attributes in the mythical text of goddess Venus? How do they fit to planet Venus?
Venus is the Roman goddess whose functions encompassed love, beauty, desire, sex, fertility, prosperity and victory. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_(mythology)

I don´t think planet Venus can live up to these qualities, do you? It is pure cherry pickings NOT to include ALL textual informations in a myth. You loose all logics in such a process.

As goddess Venus is equal to the Egyptian Milky Way goddess, Hathor, who “creates everything (in our Milky Way galaxy) in company with the primordial Egyptian god, Amun-Ra”, (the Central Light in the Milky Way) she of course have huge (electromagnetic) powers of creation which radiates out from the Milky Way center. (The 8 pointed Star symbol)
Last edited by Norman on Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:44 am, edited 3 times in total.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:23 am

@Grey Cloud,
Thanks for your comments.
Grey Cloud wrote:comingfrom wrote:
Modern people still believe in God, and give Him a gender.
And Earth is still looked upon as Mother Earth.
The Abrahamic god isn't thought of as a planet. Brahman, Tao and Nirvana are gender neutral and beyond gods. Earth is not a dot in the sky (from our perspective).

That some of the ancient myths identify some features, such as Mars' scarred face, tells us that the planets were not always just little dots.
Example(s) please.

In her terrible aspect, Venus rained terrible destruction upon the world, according to the myths.
Example(s) please of Venus' 'terrible aspect and raining destruction.

At the time denoted by the myths, the planets were not known with periodicities.
What time was that? What evidence do you have that the periodicities were not known?
Their periodicities were recorded at a later time in history.
Evidence please.
Even then, they were recognized as being the gods of old.
Evidence please.
And since the visible planets were the gods, so newly discovered planets and moons were also named after gods,
More planets and moons were not discovered until the mediaeval period, surely?

It is really nice to meet someone who is able to perform independent critical thinking and ask logical questions, thanks. :-)
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:08 am

@comingfrom,
Example(s) please of Venus' 'terrible aspect and raining destruction.
Medusa

Medusa don´t belong to the Roman Mythology and Venus.
Most sources describe Medusa as the daughter of Phorcys and Ceto.

In Greek mythology, Phorcys is a primordial sea god, generally cited (first in Hesiod) as the son of Pontus and Gaia. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phorcys

In Greek mythology, Pontus (/ˈpɒntəs/; Greek: Πόντος Pontos, "Sea") was an ancient, pre-Olympian sea-god, one of the Greek primordial deities. Pontus was Gaia's son and has no father; according to the Greek poet Hesiod, he was born without coupling, though according to Hyginus, Pontus is son of Aether and Gaia. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontus_(mythology)

Primordial and Pre-Olympian deities belongs to the period of pre-creation before anything firm was created. Besides this, "Gaia" is not the "mother Earth Goddess" as assumed by most scholars. Gaia is a Giantess and "she" stands for the creation of the "first firm soil" and form (in the Milky Way).

The primodial "deities" really stands for the modern scientific term of "cosmic clouds of gas and dust" which comes together in the swirling center of creation, which presumingly gives the mytho-cosmological symbolism of snakes as mentioned in the myth of Medusa.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Mon Apr 24, 2017 4:19 am

More on Gaia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_(mythology)#Interpretations

Some modern sources, such as James Mellaart, Marija Gimbutas and Barbara Walker, claim that Gaia as Mother Earth is a later form of a pre-Indo-European Great Mother, venerated in Neolithic times. Her existence is a speculation, and controversial in the academic community.

As said before: Gaia does not resembles "Mother Earth" but the very elementary concept of "firm matter and form". Gaia also resembles the white/light Milky Way crescent figure on the southern hemisphere. When excluding the Milky Way Mythology, it is easy to understand how the prime ancient Mother Goddess become subject for modern speculations. This is exactly what happens with the interpretations of Velikovsky and his followers as well.

They refer to the ancient cultural Myths of Creation, which in many cases even deals with a time before creation of the planets and more, to count for planets only which excludes the rest of the creation and the connected stories.

That is: They uses lots of cultural Myths of Creation, (which really speaks of a cosmological knowledge) but they exclude most of the mythical contexts in order to fit their planetary misconceptions of "an ancient alien Sky" and "a "polar configuration" that never happend.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Mon Apr 24, 2017 5:12 am

comingfrom,
The Abrahamic god isn't thought of as a planet.

I put Him as an example of a God having gender.
Yes but the discussion was about planets. All gods are male by definition. Females are goddesses. It is a question of function rather than anthropomorphic gender.

Brahman, Tao and Nirvana are gender neutral and beyond gods.
A god is whatever you worship.
Nonsense. 'God' is a technical term. Use of the word in a modern popular idiom does not in any way relate to the way it is used in ancient philosophy and theology.
Brahma is the Father (Vishnu is the Son, and Shiva is the Holy Ghost).
I didn't say 'Brahma' I said 'Brahman', these are two different things.
Brahma is the Father (Vishnu is the Son, and Shiva is the Holy Ghost).
You obviously know nothing about Indian philosophy or theology.
The Tao is the Son (God's power on Earth).
You obviously know nothing about Taoist philosophy or theology.
Nirvana is a state of being (equivalent to being in heaven).
You obviously know nothing about Buddhist philosophy or theology.
Well, according to the myths
Well, not according to the philosophers and theologians.

The Earth, Moon and Venus have always been female in the eyes of man.
Incorrect. To the Egyptians, Earth was Geb a male. Venus is Shukra, a male, in Indian astronomy.

Medusa.
One word is not evidence. Where is Medusa associated with Aphrodite/Venus? What of Medusa's two sisters; her parents; her sexual union with Poseidon; her time as a priestess of Athene; Pegasus and Chrysoar? Where indeed are the stories of her raining down destruction upon Earth?
Medousa from the Greek 'medo' - to protect, to rule over.
Sthenno - forceful
Euryale - far-roaming.

I am going on Velikovsky and Talbot's word here.
That explains why you are talking rubbish. ;)
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby comingfrom » Mon Apr 24, 2017 5:46 pm

Thank you, Norman.

If you need catastrophic forces in your hypothesis, you of course focus on these in order to build up your theory of "ancient planetary disasters".
I see it the other way around.
The evidence for past catastrophes exists, and we are looking for explanations.

But what about the benign attributes in the mythical text of goddess Venus? How do they fit to planet Venus?
I attribute these to her appearance and actions whilst in the congregation of the gods.

I don´t think planet Venus can live up to these qualities, do you? It is pure cherry pickings NOT to include ALL textual informations in a myth. You loose all logics in such a process.
I think that she can, and did.
And ALL the textual information is our proof of that.

As goddess Venus is equal to the Egyptian Milky Way goddess, Hathor, who “creates everything (in our Milky Way galaxy) in company with the primordial Egyptian god, Amun-Ra”, (the Central Light in the Milky Way) she of course have huge (electromagnetic) powers of creation which radiates out from the Milky Way center. (The 8 pointed Star symbol
You said I lose all logics, but you are obviously working with a different logic to me.

What you say cannot be applied to a planet, you happily apply the Milky Way.
In my logic, a nearby wandering planet is far more likely to impress upon men than the static image which is the Milky Way.

Medusa don´t belong to the Roman Mythology and Venus.
Greek.

Primordial and Pre-Olympian deities belongs to the period of pre-creation before anything firm was created. Besides this, "Gaia" is not the "mother Earth Goddess" as assumed by most scholars. Gaia is a Giantess and "she" stands for the creation of the "first firm soil" and form (in the Milky Way).

The primodial "deities" really stands for the modern scientific term of "cosmic clouds of gas and dust" which comes together in the swirling center of creation, which presumingly gives the mytho-cosmological symbolism of snakes as mentioned in the myth of Medusa.
I just can't believe cosmic clouds and dust is something the ancient peoples would have wanted to write about in the manner which they did.

The first planetary nebula to be discovered was the Dumbbell Nebula, M27, by Charles Messier in 1764.

src:http://www.space.com/17715-planetary-nebula.html


Sincere best wishes
~Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby comingfrom » Mon Apr 24, 2017 6:30 pm

Thank you, Grey Cloud.

Nonsense. 'God' is a technical term. Use of the word in a modern popular idiom does not in any way relate to the way it is used in ancient philosophy and theology.
I use the term in the same context that God uses it.
Or, if you prefer, in the same context His word uses it.

I didn't say 'Brahma' I said 'Brahman', these are two different things.
Brahmans are a cast in India (also, a breed of cattle).
I presumed you were referencing the Hindu god.

You obviously know nothing about Indian philosophy or theology.
I have done a comparative study of the religions.
I do know some things.

You obviously know nothing about Taoist philosophy or theology.
You obviously know too much about what other people you don't even know know.

You obviously know nothing about Buddhist philosophy or theology.
I thank you for your corrections, but they haven't advanced my knowledge.

Well, not according to the philosophers and theologians.
My knowledge comes from texts, my understandings from above.

Incorrect. To the Egyptians, Earth was Geb a male. Venus is Shukra, a male, in Indian astronomy.
Thank you. Yes, there are exceptions.

When I said always, I meant for all time, for most cultures.

One word is not evidence. Where is Medusa associated with Aphrodite/Venus? What of Medusa's two sisters; her parents; her sexual union with Poseidon; her time as a priestess of Athene; Pegasus and Chrysoar? Where indeed are the stories of her raining down destruction upon Earth?
Medousa from the Greek 'medo' - to protect, to rule over.
Sthenno - forceful
Euryale - far-roaming.
It was a pointer.
The only evidence is the myths, and they have to be interpreted.

The thing about comparative mythology is to find those things that are in agreement and to work from there.
Then you can start to unravel some of the characters, and their deeds.

That explains why you are talking rubbish. ;)
When I investigate a theory, I try it on.
I don't conduct my investigation with naysaying.

No one can say for sure if the TBP interpretation is correct, or how much of it is correct.
My guess is that even Talbot will concede this.

Since trying it on, it has fit well it my model.
The best physical evidence for it, imo, is Mars' oceans and much of its northern hemisphere crust now sitting in orbit around Saturn. The Tharsis Montes and Valles Marineris show where the thunderbolts struck.

Sincere warm regards
~Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Tue Apr 25, 2017 1:04 am

@comingfrom,
Me:
As goddess Venus is equal to the Egyptian Milky Way goddess, Hathor, who “creates everything (in our Milky Way galaxy) in company with the primordial Egyptian god, Amun-Ra”, (the Central Light in the Milky Way) she of course have huge (electromagnetic) powers of creation which radiates out from the Milky Way center. (The 8 pointed Star symbol).

You said I lose all logics, but you are obviously working with a different logic to me.

Yes. I take the natural approach of fitting the mythical texts and symbols to natural observations in the Sky, as our ancestors did.
What you say cannot be applied to a planet, you happily apply the Milky Way.
In my logic, a nearby wandering planet is far more likely to impress upon men than the static image which is the Milky Way.

The myth of Venus regards a female figure and female attributes, right?

Planet Venus.jpg
Planet Venus as observed now.

Planet Venus.Close.jpg
Planet Venus observed with telescope.

Milky Way Southern Contours.gif
The cultural imagination of the Milky Way Goddess
Milky Way Southern Contours.gif (34.31 KiB) Viewed 1126 times

Which of these images fits naturally and logical to the Venus myth and female form and attributes? Is it logical to ascribe female form and gender to a dotted planet? Or is it logical to ascribe female form and gender to a celestial figure which can be imagined as a woman in the Sky, as for instants with the Egyptian goddess Hathor, who is connected to the Milky Way?

You see? What happens when scholars replace Milky Way myths and images with planets? They of course distorts both the myths and the astronomical imagery. They cannot fit their "planetary myths" to the factual and actual celestial imagery and then they assume the planets to once have been otherwise located i.e. in a different "planetary polar configuration" and "Symbols of an Ancient Alien Sky", which is pure Science Fiction and really on the levels of popular astrology.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:24 am

@comingfrom,

You replied to Grey Cloud:
No one can say for sure if the TBP interpretation is correct, or how much of it is correct.
My guess is that even Talbot will concede this.

In the extent that Milky Way myths are replaced with "planetary myths", I certainly can say for sure that the TBP mythical interpretations are incorrect, which is very unfortunate indeed since the ancient cultural Myths of Creation fits very well to the strict scientific explanations in the Electric Universe.

The ancient Myths of Creation don´t specifically explain the creation of the entire Universe, but "just" the pre-creation and factual creation of the Milky Way, which was the full content of the ancient World Picture. The numerous cultural Myths of Creation can very easily be interpreted into the modern scientific explanations and to the Electric Universe.

That is: If one connects the right myth to the right celestial imagery and it´s motions - which isn´t the case with the TBP interpretation. There are more than planets in the creation and everything else of course have to be included in a creation myth - also in a alternative theory of assumed different planetary conditions.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:11 am

More on the Electric Universe and the mythical interpretation, included the Milky Way.

There is evidently a strong electric current in the center of the Milky Way. Where there is a standing electric current, there is a perpendicular magnetic field which creates the Milky Way disc itself and provides rotational and orbital motion to everything in the galaxy and subsequently to the Solar System.

In the Egyptian myth of creation, The Ogdoad, this creation is described by 4 pairs of elementary (male and female) forces, qualities and elements which came together, which resulted in a "fiery Light" in the center, called Amun-Ra.

Amun-Ra and the Milky Way goddess Hathor had a complex relationship and together they created everything in the ancient known part of the Universe, the Milky Way. Links - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hathor#Relationships.2C_associations.2C_images.2C_and_symbols

In this way the Egyptians mytho-cosmologically described the electric light in the Milky Way center, "The First Central and Enclosed Light", Amun-Ra, which is interpreted by most scholars to represent the Sun, but this is wrong because Amun-Ra is closely and directly connected to the Milky Way realms via goddess Hathor who represents the contours of the Milky Way i.e. "she" is the Great Mother Goddess who gives form and life to everything, as stated in the numerous cultural descriptions of their prime mother goddess. Link - http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/ogdoad.html

In this way one can deduce that our ancestors knew perfectly well how the creation of the Milky Way went on and that ancient knowledge fully can compete with modern cosmological sccience and compute with the Electric Universe Theory - and the ancient knowledge ever supercedes the modern thinking just because of the ancient perception of a cyclic formation in the Universe.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:59 am

comingfrom,
I use the term in the same context that God uses it.
Or, if you prefer, in the same context His word uses it.
No, you were using it in a modern vernacular sense -
A god is whatever you worship.
Many people today rather worship atheistic concepts.
I also know a man whose god is Beer.
The original point concerned equating gods with planets , to which I made the statement that the Abrahamic god is not viewed as a planet. Norman also made the point that there are 12 gods in the Roman pantheon but only 7 planets.

Brahmans are a cast in India (also, a breed of cattle).
I presumed you were referencing the Hindu god.
I was referring to this:
In Hinduism, Brahman (/brəhmən/; ब्रह्मन्) connotes the highest Universal Principle, the Ultimate Reality in the universe. In major schools of Hindu philosophy, it is the material, efficient, formal and final cause of all that exists. It is the pervasive, genderless, infinite, eternal truth and bliss which does not change, yet is the cause of all changes. Brahman as a metaphysical concept is the single binding unity behind the diversity in all that exists in the universe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman [My emphasis]

I have done a comparative study of the religions.
I do know some things.
I'll rephrase: You know next to nothing.

You obviously know too much about what other people you don't even know know.
One can never know too much. I have only gone off what you wrote. I have challenged your statements and asked for evidence; your responses have been less than convincing and your evidence virtually non-existent.

I thank you for your corrections, but they haven't advanced my knowledge.
More fool you then.

My knowledge comes from texts, my understandings from above.
Talbot, Velikovsky and god?

It was a pointer.
A pointer to what? There is no connection between Medusa and Aphrodite/Venus that I am aware of. This smacks of the sort of twaddle Talbot or Velikovsky would write. If it was one of them, do they provide any evidence or a reference or is it one of a string of assertions?

The only evidence is the myths, and they have to be interpreted.
I could ask you to define 'myth' but in any case they are not the only source of evidence. Plato discusses catatrophe in Laws for example.
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby comingfrom » Wed Apr 26, 2017 4:59 am

Norman,

your little image of the Milky Way doesn't look anything like a goddess to me.
That's not counting the fact that that little outlined diagram doesn't look anything like the Milky Way looks when you look up at night.

Like I said, I try theories on, and I tried on yours.
Even to the point of looking up at the Milky Way for hours, trying to find the mythical characters you say are there,
and trying to imagine how the Milky Way could inspire the dramas portrayed in myths.

On the other hand, I can see how Venus, as comet with streamers coming off her, could most definitely have looked like a Mother Goddess, and Medusa.
And a red planet that caused hail stones when it loomed large and near, I can easily see how it could be considered to be a warrior God.

~~~~
Grey Cloud.

No, you were using it in a modern vernacular sense -
God said, we are all gods.
Because God said we are all gods, I gird myself as a man.

The modern vernacular usage of 'God' doesn't normally recognize all men to be one.

The original point concerned equating gods with planets , to which I made the statement that the Abrahamic god is not viewed as a planet. Norman also made the point that there are 12 gods in the Roman pantheon but only 7 planets.
Only 5 visible to the naked eye.
But, if the Earth was a satellite of Saturn, then Saturn's larger moons would have been prominently visible.
Zeus' children also (Jupiter's moons).

Talbot, Velikovsky and god?
Prayed in the Holy Ghost to know the scriptures, and the love of God.

A pointer to what? There is no connection between Medusa and Aphrodite/Venus that I am aware of. This smacks of the sort of twaddle Talbot or Velikovsky would write. If it was one of them, do they provide any evidence or a reference or is it one of a string of assertions?
So you do know what.
But you'll have to familiarize yourself with Velikovsky to judge.
Asking insinuating questions is no way to judge.

I could ask you to define 'myth' but in any case they are not the only source of evidence. Plato discusses catatrophe in Laws for example.
Myth can denote a lot of things.
There are modern suburban myths, for example.
Myth can also mean an untrue fact.

But the myths of interest to the Saturn model are the ancient texts.
~Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Wed Apr 26, 2017 5:15 am

Norman,
Nanna and Sin are male deities and so provide further counter-examples to the sweeping genralisations of the advocates of the Saturn theory.

Selene, Helios and Kronos are not Olympians so the 7 planets and 12 gods equation gets even more problematic.

And let us not forget that there is a world of difference between 'a planet is a god' and 'a planet is associated with a god'.
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Wed Apr 26, 2017 8:08 am

comingfrom,
You may want to peruse my critique of Cardona's God Star:
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1016&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=15#p10555

Norman,
Before going into further discussions: How do you interpret, differ and mytho-cosmologically place Titans, Giants and Olympians?
Giants - not enough information (or too much conflicting information). Titans possibly an older pantheon which was partially incorporated or merged with a later (Olympian)?
In any pantheon all the gods are aspects of the one god and all the goddesses are aspects of the one goddess. The goddess is prior to the god.
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

PreviousNext

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests