Back to the Holy Grail and Language
As noted by Fulcanelli, when one begins to study the subject with an eye for subtle “clues”, one begins to understand that the very words chosen in the numerous tales are designed to either lead to, or away from, the central issue. In other words, not only are the incidents clues in themselves, but the very names are as well. They are installed as helpers or hindrances! Sometimes this may even be a function of the individual reading the clue, as we now understand from our little study of ligands. An individual who is “jumping to assumptions”, or who has accepted as truth things which are not, in fact, true — and may have done so habitually — has a reduced ability for discernment. The individual who has taken great care, who has been patient and thorough and cautious, may be led to a proper understanding by the very same clue that leads another on a wild goose chase!
The clues are in the languages and the words, but hidden like little genes coiled up in DNA, waiting for the right ligand or charge of electricity to enable them to uncoil and make themselves known. And this brings us to the fact that there seems to be a
deep connection between language and DNA.
Abraham Abehsera writes in his
Babel: The Language of the 21st Century:
Matter, Life and Language are three instances where infinite wealth has been achieved with very little. The variety of matter is the product of the combinations of about twenty-six atoms. The innumerable life forms of our planet stem from the permutations of only twenty amino acids. Third and last, the millions of words that make up human language are nothing but the combinations of about twenty consonants modified by some five vowels.
In the past fifty years, man has made considerable progress in discovering and deciphering the physical and genetic forces that organize inert and organic matter. No comparable advances have been made in the field of language. Why did English-speaking people use the letters L and V to express their LoVe? (and LiVe) What compelled them to designate the opposite feeling by inverting the same two root-letters to form ViLe? (and eViL) Finally why were totally different letters used to express these feelings in the six thousand other languages the earth has known? Our thoughts and our words are thus made of chains of letters, the logic of which escapes us totally.
Man, the author of speech, is himself made of chains of molecules and proteins the laws of which are well known to us. We may well suppose a strict continuity between these biological rules and those that organize his highest faculty, language. In other words, we may assume that the laws that rule his flesh also rule his speech. Such a biology of word formation, valid for all of man’s languages, ...is situated at the crossroads of not only all of this earth’s tongues, but also all forms of expression, such as art, science [and] children’s stories. (Myths) One of its fundamental rules is that words strictly adhere to the objects, situations or beings they designate. Far from being merely convenient tools of communication, words are thick, multidimensional, densely interrelated structures, which contain limitless information.
During at least one-third of our life, we revert to using words in such a universal language. In our dreams we may be called on by a stone or dialogue with a flower, a bird or a water spring. Dreams are pieces of a whole language in which words are still connected to the objects they designate. Night is thus the time when man recovers his full faculty of speech.
In Dreams and Myths, man uses the universal language and it is in understanding this “green language” of the alchemists that we come to some understanding of our reality and how it is shaped by the actions of higher level beings (“gods”) who are hyperdimensional and therefore, outside of time. It is through this that we come to an understanding of what the Holy Grail really is and what it can really do. It can really do all that is recorded in myth and legend — literally — and even more!
What we are seeing is that many “esoteric” interpretations of ancient knowledge may be mere wishful thinking. We are advocating the idea that science should shine the light of reason and the scientific method upon them. But, we also can see that science, as it is generally done in our world, is woefully inadequate to the task.
Very early in the Cassiopaean contact, “myself in the future” began to use quote marks in a rather unusual way; that is, a manner that did not strictly follow the accepted rules of grammar and punctuation. I became curious about this and asked:
Q: (L) I have been poring over this material and it occurs to me that certain words have been put in quotes for a reason, yes?
A: We put in quotes what we want further examined.
I didn’t realize then that I was going to be teaching myself this “universal language”. I began to keep a notebook of these quoted words and my studies in their interpretations. I began with simply looking them up in the dictionary and discovering the fullest possible meaning or varieties of meanings. This then led to tracking the words back to their roots and discovering other words that “grew” from the same roots, and often this involved working in other languages. It was utterly amazing how connections became clear in this way. For example: consider the term “Emerald Tablets”. Emerald: variety of Beryl — ME + OF — Emeralde — VL + L — smaraldus/ smaragdus — Gr — amaragdos meaning “of oriental origin”. So, we go to “orient”. Oriental — L orientalis — Eastern. Then we look at “eastern” and find: Eastern — IE base “aues” — to shine — whence Aurora — dawn/east — and aurum — gold. Moving on to “gold”, we find: Gold — IE base “ghel” — to shine, to gleam, symbol Au — Aurora, lover of Orion. And then, finally, we look at “green”. Green — IE base “ghro” — to become. So, what we have found is that a great many ideas come into play in considering the “Emerald Tablets”, and this will later become very important.
At the same time, I noticed that, very often, a word that began with a specific meaning became reversed over time. I also noted that the various alphabets in use by human beings had certain relationships that were either similar or antagonistic. I also discovered that, at a certain point, letters were added to several 22 letter alphabets to make them 24 letter alphabets, and at about the same time, the zodiac was tinkered with, a sign was added and another one split in two. And, this very period of time was related to all of the issues that lead us to the problem of the Grail. It became clear that someone or some force or tendency was at work here that resulted in the
“Babel Syndrome”, as I came to call it. I could see the “tracks” of some influence that was determined to make the solution of the mystery as difficult as possible by tossing extra puzzle pieces into the pile; pieces that would lead generations of searchers astray. I knew that I needed to find some sort of “standard” by which to evaluate these clues, so, I inquired about this:
Q: I am tracking the clues through the various languages and alphabets. I would like to know which of these alphabets, Runic, Greek, or Etruscan, preceded the others, and from which the others are derived?
A: Etruscan.
Q: Well, who were the Etruscans?
A: Templar carriers.
Q: What does that mean?
A: Seek and ye shall find.
Q: Well, how am I supposed to do that? I can’t find anything else on the Etruscans! What are Templar carriers?
A: Penitent Avian Lords.
Q: What does that mean?
A: For your search. All is drawn from some more ancient form.
[…]
Q: Well, I think that a HUGE key is in the tracking of the languages...
A: The roots of all languages are identical...
Q: What do you mean?
A: Your origin.
Q: You mean Orion?
A: Interesting the word root similarity, yes?
Q: Well, the word root similarities of a LOT of things are VERY interesting! It is AMAZING the things I have discovered by tracking word roots...
A: The architects of your languages left clues aplenty.
Richard Rudgley tells us in
The Lost Civilizations of the Stone Age that there are between 5,000 and 10,000 different languages in the world today. This fact echoes the Biblical story of the
Tower of Babel.
The question is, of course, was there ever a single language in our remote past that would suggest a global antediluvian civilization? As a matter of fact, there is.
One noted linguist, Hans Pederson, has expressed the opinion that there is a definite relationship between the supposedly distinct and independent language families of Indo-European, Semitic, Uralic, Altaic and even Eskimo-Aleut. He posits that
all these language groups were in fact descended from a remote language ancestral to them all which he called Nostratic, from the Latin noster, meaning ‘our’. In this language, there are many words associated with agriculture and husbandry, which suggests a farming economy. However, among the 2,000 roots of the Proto-Nostratic lexical stock, we do not find words suggesting acquaintance with agriculture or husbandry, but we do find many terms associated with hunting and food gathering.
In other words,
it could be suggested that Proto-Nostratic belongs to the post-diluvian world which is designated by mainstream science as the ‘Neolithic revolution’, while most of its descendent languages belong to the Neolithic epoch of food-producing economy.
As it happens, the most ancient center of Neolithic economy in western Eurasia was situated in southwest Asia, which leads to a preliminary hypothesis that Proto-Nostratic was spoken in southwest Asia at a period prior to the ‘Neolithic revolution’. Most of its daughter -languages belong to the Neolithic epoch, and their spread over large territories of Eurasia and Africa was connected with the demographic explosion caused by the ‘Neolithic revolution’.
Now, pay careful attention here:
The implications of the Nostratic hypothesis are mind-boggling. The theory proposes that most of the peoples of Europe and those in a large part of western Asia and parts of Africa were speaking Nostratic languages way back in prehistory, before the advent of agriculture.
The project of reconstructing the vocabulary of the Nostratic language takes us deep into the Upper Paleolithic period, the latter part of the Old Stone Age! If the Nostratic language hypothesis is right, then it must be more than 10,000 years old and is likely to be nearer 15,000 years old.
The linguists are actually getting quite daring because there is another even more controversial hypothesis, which is that of a Dene-Sino-Caucasian language that includes languages as diverse as Basque, Chinese, Sumerian, and Haida. If this is shown to be a genuine language group, then it must, like Nostratic and Eurasiatic, be of Upper Paleolithic age.
Some linguists even propose that they can reconstruct the primordial ancestor of all the world’s languages, a language called either Proto-Global or Proto-World. Some of them have assembled etymologies which they believe indicate a connection between all of the world’s language families showing a correlation in respect not only to the meaning of the words, but also to their sound.
Many “mainstream” scientists are amazed and troubled by the fact that these correspondences exist across time and space and that languages found as far field as the deserts of southern Africa, the Amazon rain forest, the Arctic and the cities of Europe still retain links from a remote time when they must have all been closely connected. But they cannot deny what is being proposed. Repeated accidental resemblance of both meaning and sound on a global scale is too unlikely to contemplate.
That such parallels exist between language groups in distant parts of the world is striking and is hard to dismiss simply as mere coincidence. In fact, this hypothesis takes us back over 20,000 years to some time before these two macro-families must have split to go their separate ways.
This is why word studies are so important. If we hypothesize an ancient high technology, and that myths and legends are
disjecta membra of this civilization, coming as close to the original meaning of words is of crucial importance.
The conclusion is that the various proto-languages that are said to belong to the Nostratic group could have dispersed from the zone in which agriculture seems to have first developed, namely the Near East and Anatolia. In this scenario the expansion of these languages beyond the region would be directly associated with the spread of farming. The parent language, Proto-Nostratic would thus be located somewhere in the core region and obviously to a time preceding the origins of agriculture.
