The Odyssey - Manual of Secret Teachings?

I just found this link - you can listen to it online or download each chapter as a podcast.

http://www.learnoutloud.com/Free-Audio-Video/Literature/Ancient-and-Medieval-Classics/The-Odyssey/23731#listen


Thank you Aleana, very much :)

Mod Note: Fixed font colors for readability.
 
Victor Davis Hanson and John Heath came to mind when William Hanson was mentioned above, as was the great circle of cosmogonies through different cultures, epochs and tongues.

Quite interesting reading material shared so far as well!

:dance:

Hanson and Heaths "Who Killed Homer?" has been my recent reading material for it seems the story of this thread from exploring the stategies and hidden gems and lessons of the Odyssey, is central to the story of Homer, whether that be the story of the poet and seer, mnemonic impression and threading stories, the whole question of who is a Bard?

It has been some time since I've last read the Odyssey but now will be reading it once more. Fitzgerald.

Here then is the Prologue to Who Killed Homer? which I first read in my senior year of classics undecided to continue my pursuit in the field, or to think about life after college. Final semester senior year our assigned reading included Who Killed Homer?.

It describes the problem from another angle

PROLOGUE

Xanthus, why do you prophesy my death?

There is no need for that.

Homer, Iliad
(Achilles to his horse)


"How far is Athens from Sparta?" (silence)

"Why did the Mycenaean world collapse?" (silence)

"Why did the Athenians sponsor dramatic performances?" (silence)

"What are some Western values that began with the Greeks?"

We no longer ask these questions of recent Classics PhD's at job interviews, whose mastery of the Greek and Latin languages and literatures was supposed to explicate the origins and complexity of the West to the rest of us. Instead, more likely we are asked the following by young academic candidates who study the Greeks:

"what is the teaching load like?"
"Are there opportunities for junior faculty research grants?"
"Should I tell you something about my dissertation?"

Why is this so?

These freshly minted Classicists are bright, young-and, increasingly, not-so-young--men and women. They read Latin and Greek, and they even read about Latin and Greek in French, German, and Italian. They have often visited Greece and have walked through Rome. They can usually scan hexameters; they know something of rhetoric and ideology; and they are ready to quote French theorists like Michel Foucault.

Most would-be professors of Classics are products of the best universities that America has to offer. Many are polite and erudite. Most are desperately afraid that after nine to fifteen years of formal university study of the Classics they will find no real job--and the majority will not. Those who emerge from graduate school--well less than half of those who entered--have done exactly what they were told, read precisely what was assigned, and modeled themselves closely after their advisors. And they are eager to publish, keen to belong to the new school of criticism, and confident that they can now "do theory". Each new cohort of potential Greek and Latin professor looks, talks, acts and dresses like those who have taught them.

Thus often they know very little of the Greeks --and act and think like Greeks rarely or not at all. A very few may have successful careers as Classicists, but most will be failures as Hellenes, as explicators and stewards of Greek wisdom. You the public will never know who they are, read what they write, or listen to what they say. To watch the bustle of the annual year end convention of the American Philological Association--the official brotherhood of Classicists--is to learn of this great divide between the ancient Greeks themselves and the profession of Classics.

Over a four day period there are over three-hundred papers presented and panels convened on everything from ancient tranvestism to trimeters. More than five-thousand university press books and monographs will be listed or on display in a huge exhibit hall. A few hundred unemployed PhD's stand transfixed at a small chalkboard where jobs for Greek and Latin professors are listed every half hour or so. They browse there in the dozens hoping that one of the years very few job-hiring universities--the great majority offering one semester or one year sabbatical replacement work only at the lowest university wage. No Classicist, employed or not, seems to notice the millions right outside the hotel doors who know nothing--and care nothing--of the Greeks who inaugurated the very culture that ensures them a liberty, bounty and security found nowhere else. (Free Press, 1998)

So many PhD's in Classics, so little employment. So little teaching of the Greeks, so much writing about them to so few. So many new approaches, new theories, so many cleverly entitled talks, books, articles, and panels; and still almost no jobs--because there are almost no students---because there is really no interest the Greeks in or out of university. So much effort for so few, so little for so many. If only we who teach the classical worlds had as many undergraduates--or just interested Americans--as there are professors and graduate students! But then we would need people who think and act like Greeks, not Classicists, to teach us about Greece.

In short, to understand what has killed the formal study of Classical antiquity, you can spend four days among the nations top Greek scholars, usually in a very cold east-coast city right after Christmas, and hear little about who the Greeks were, much less why anyone on the planet should care to think or act like a Greek. It would be cruel, but not untrue, to confess that most of these senior professors, the architects of present-day Classics, who hurry to presentations, network and trade gossip do not look like those who held the pass at Thermopylae. They do not talk like the condemned Socrates or see the world at all as Sophocles saw it. There are no doomed Achilleses here, no mournful Sappho, and surely no tough amateurs waiting for the Persians at Marathon. America's stewards of the Greeks are not flippant like Archilochus; they lack both the humor of Aristophanes and the solemnity of Thucydides. How did we grow so utterly distant from those to whom we have devoted our lives?

This book investigates why the Greeks are so important and why they are so little known. Why do professors of Greek and Latin teach us that our present Western notions of constitutional government, free speech, individual rights, civilian control over the military, separation between religious and political authority, middle class egalitarianism, private property, and free scientific inquiry are both vital to our present existence and derive from the ancient Greeks? We two (Hanson and Heath) have been curious about this bothersome paradox--wonderful field, no interest--for over twenty years, and believe that we now can provide a few answers.

Who Killed Homer? then, is a story of why we should all care about the vast gulf between the vitality of the Greeks and the timidity of those who are responsible for preserving the Greeks, between the clarity and exuberance of the former and the obscurity and dullness of the latter. Yet it is not another analysis (academic or popular) of the decline of The University. Nor will you find here a direct engagement in the Culture Wars. Those so serious books--philosophical essays and journalistic exposes--have all been published. Perhaps too many times. Since the publication of Allan Bloom's "The Closing of the American Mind" in 1987, both well-deserved indignation and self-serving vitriol--usually accompanied by statistics redolent of the social sciences--have been directed at modernity in general and in particular at the liberal ideology that permeates higher education in the United States. But here we are more interested in the behaviour and the culture of the Classicist than in his politics. If we are critical of current ideology and theory, it is not merely from political disagreement, but more often because of dissimulation and hypocrisy--the wide gulf between what Classicists now say and what they do, and because such methodologies do little to interest middling students or the public in the ancient Greeks, and because they have not saved but helped to ruin Classics in its eleventh hour.

Instead Who Killed Homer? is more about the death of a hard and peculiar way of looking at the world--the way the ancient Greeks viewed their universe. This is our first and primary story: the meaning and significance of this ancient Greek vision of life--what we mean in our title by "Homer" --and consequences for the modern world of its near abandonment. Homer is the first and best creative dividend of the polis, and so serves as a primer for the entire, subsequent world of the Greeks. But because classical antiquity no longer has much life of its own in America--that is, because the ancient Greeks and Romans are for the most part solely encased in something called the Department of Classics at the local university--Who Killed Homer? must also be about the death of an academic discipline, the oldest field (once the only field) in higher education.

(EMPHASIS ADDED)
 
Herakles, can you please address this post - http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,24915.msg290139.html#msg290139

A few of your posts recently have been unnecessarily rude, so we'd like to know what's going on.
 
Adolanaea, sorry, but your post is unreadable. Please don't use light colored fonts.
 
"We are you in the future." What does that "you" mean? Based on the answers the Cs have given, it is a number of individual "consciousness units" that are members of a particular soul group. (They may or may not be incarnated.) Thus, channeling the Cs would probably depend on whether or not that individual is a member of that particular soul group. The Cs have also said that the constellations in the sky are information about various soul groups, so there are clearly others.



I don`t yet fully understand myself what I am going to try to say, so if this sounds off the wall then I apologize. Ever since I first started reading about gods/goddesses I couldn`t help but think that they were somehow just aspects or attributes of some "special" kind of humans.

That somehow if enough people got together, all with the same attributes/spirit, and cultivated certain ideals to become something pure with good intent, then this attribute/ideal, becomes a seperate energy, or force, or what we would call, or maybe the ancients called a god or goddess, this being some "energy form" separate from, yet connected to the humans that "created" it through their own effort.

It seems that any clash of the "gods" would be a kind of battle of the wills, or the attributes/spirit, or intent of one group of people opposing another, in another dimensions,or otherwise.

Of course this doesn`t work well when you take into account the 4D aspect of it, or that the gods were aliens etc. But I can`t help thinking that there is more involving the "people" themselves and some spiritual energy or actual connection to these energy forms that they actually possessed, or controlled then we know about.

I really don`t know where I was going with this, so sorry for the extra noise if it`s no where.
 
Laura said:
Abraham is ninety-nine years old shortly before the episode (Gen. 17:1). Both men are leaders of

When i was 14-16 yrs old, we were taken to a school trip/summer camp/adventure holiday, for the purpose of learning history, visiting remarkable places in our country. There was a historical hill-house and a mill. Lots of antique pieces related to wheat, corn and the fascinating old life. There were paintings about 1 x 1.2 meter in size on the walls of the mill-house, displaying people in (pre?)medieval clothes.

_http://mexicoinsmallbytes.com/mexicoblog/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/medieval-clothing-2.jpg

_http://lena.torps.net/medeltid/bildertillhtm/klader/1500tal/flamhel.jpg

Their age were written on their portraits (oil paintings). The problem was this:
1240 A.D. - 1376 A.D.
1150 A.D. - 1420 A.D.
etc.. Almost all of them were over 120 years old. Some of them were 200-250-300. What the heck? Where these bluffs? Our guide wasn't surprised at all and remarked that so long ago the food, wheat breads, corn, water, environment must have been so clean as to enable some of these people extended lives. (?!)

These stories, the pieces of info struck me profoundly then with a strange, powerful sensation, something akin to painful nostalgia. Same strong sensation was when we visited a monastery with actual young monks (place served also as catholic high-school/univ.) walking in heavy thick black robes (fully covered), wearing thick (ship)ropes in place of belts. They were coming & going but always kneeling before the great altar (big cathedral style) for a moment (that struck me) and the strange old smell of that place, the heavy brown/magenta/yellow/green/gold colors, the big paintings awakened the same strange longing, painful nostalgia.
 
seeking_spirals said:
This is a wonderfully fascinating thread! It's given me much food for thought already and I'm excited to read The Odyssey with the group. I've never read the book before but I purchased a copy of Butler's translation that has both The Odyssey and The Iliad in one volume a couple years ago and this thread has inspired me to pick it up. Thanks Laura for initiating this project!

Laura said:

{My thought on this "lack of respect" is that it includes a denial of existence and lack of care in observing reality and interacting with it as it is. Other ideas, anyone?}

This makes sense to me, as to remain ignorant or choose to ignore the "wrathful faces of god" is to leave oneself open to attack.

Gods could be raw nature-forces (higher density & superintelligent) and the act of respecting them may be research. Researching the stone circle mechanism for example, trying to make one, then getting it to work, as nature-forces intended (counting in that during process the builders say prayers naturally to DCM) could be the required action of respecting a raw nature-force, the proper way. Resulting in successful switching on the stone-circle and receive materialized food as needed. Food of ancient quality, unpolluted, highest nutritional value possible: a property of raw life-giving power of a nature force.

Lack of respect could be ignorance, twisted military research to make deadly weapons nowadays, negative theoxeny, turning away from nature forces that can give life, abusing, raping everything that lives. Turning toward wrathful raw nature-forces that naturally take away life, with death & annihilation as result.

Respecting raw electricity for example makes me not putting my hand to it. Lack of respect of raw electricity would make me dead. Respect may involve awareness, applying knowledge with alertness while approaching the nature forces (Gods), knowing how to use their properties to gain life support from them. Lack of respect of the Gods and their laws may imply sleep, letting ones guard down, allowing entropy, STS-influences (like angry waves of a sea-God) to breach the dams (my defenses), causing me to fall overboard, sinking into the depths.

Hard to see the real meaning. Besides the basic idea of many I's(suitors), the driver(Odysseus-asleep obeying-A influences), Master(Odysseus-arriving to home listening to B influences), horses(Penelope?, Telemachus?, raiding seamen), etc. which comes automatically to mind, as if over the whole Odyssey and OT relations there would have been a heavy blanket purposefully put. Yet the unseen feels so close, a great importance hidden here.

The God's actions in Odyssey are also perplexing, because they seem to severely limit the range of human free choices and action. Whole Odyssey starts to feel as when i read about mocking remarks of Gurdjieff to which people reacted upset, their internal views/world in upheaval, suspecting a truth hidden and annoyance of not being able to come to solution.
 
Aloha, All!

I was doing some research about other things and came across this information. I don't know if this relates to the "ring structure" in the Odyssey, but I thought it might be worth sharing, and it seems to have other symbolism as well...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterocyclic_amine

Five-membered heterocyclic amines

The compound pyrrolidine is composed of molecules that contain a saturated ring of five atoms. This cyclic structure is composed of one atom of nitrogen and four carbon. Nicotine is a molecule containing a pyrrolidine ring attached to a ring of pyridine (other heterocyclic amine). Nicotine belongs to a group of compounds known as alkaloids, which are amines found in nature and produce physiological changes in animals. Pyrrole is another compound made up of molecules with a five-membered heterocyclic ring. These molecules are unsaturated and contain a nitrogen atom in the ring. Four pyrrole rings are joined in a ring structure called a porphyrin. The rings of porphyrin are components of hemoglobin, myoglobin, vitamin B12 , chlorophyll and cytochromes. In the centers of heme in hemoglobin, myoglobin and cytochromes, iron is an ion, in the first two iron ion is bound to oxygen.

Six-membered heterocyclic amines

The structure of pyridine is similar to that of benzene except that a nitrogen atom replaces one carbon atom.

And, incidentally, I happened upon this, fwiw:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramidal_cell

Pyramidal neurons (pyramidal cells) are a type of neuron found in areas of the brain including cerebral cortex, the hippocampus, and in the amygdala. Pyramidal neurons are the primary excitation units of the mammalian prefrontal cortex and the corticospinal tract. Pyramidal neurons were first discovered and studied by Santiago Ramón y Cajal.[1][2] Since then, studies on pyramidal neurons have focused on topics ranging from neuroplasticity to cognition.

[...]

Pyramidal neurons in the prefrontal cortex are implicated in cognitive ability. In mammals, the complexity of pyramidal cells increases from posterior to anterior brain regions. The degree of complexity of pyramidal neurons is likely linked to the cognitive capabilities of different anthropoid species. Because the prefrontal cortex receives inputs from areas of the brain that are involved in processing all the sensory modalities, pyramidal cells within the prefrontal cortex may process many different types of inputs. Pyramidal cells may play a critical role in complex object recognition within the visual processing areas of the cortex

...So we've got "pyr's", ring structures, prime numbers, and nicotine here...Also, I remember iron being referred to as being significant to transit between 3D and 4D, and its being in the center reminds me of that concept of being in the center of the mosaic:

Laura said:
14 July 1996

A: Picture yourself as being at the center of a mosaic.

And I happened upon this other reference to a mosaic:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/wave13g.htm

There are many types of receptors on the surface of the cell, and if they were color coded, the cell surface would look like a wild mosaic made up of at least 70 different colors. The numbers of "tiles" in the mosaic are staggering - 50,000 of one kind, 10,000 of another, 100,000 of still another, and on and on. A typical neuron can have millions of receptors on its surface.

...And the following, from same article, seems pertinent:

I know that some of you are noticing right away the significance of these numbers and thinking about all of the "mystical terms" in the world of metaphysics that somehow never manage to make much sense; and now we are beginning to look at these things and realize that such numbers may have a very deep meaning, though not in the ritual and magickal sense. We are getting an idea that, perhaps, all the myths and so-called "secrets" that are veiled so heavily in analogy and allegory, may just be real science. As Jessie Weston remarked, we may be dealing with the "disjecta membra of a vanished civilization." And even if it is not garbled information from some ancient peoples who were technically more advanced than we are, it could be information from legitimate "higher sources" that has been hidden in allusion and mystery. It may be that all the hoo-doo stuff that has been passed down to us is just the mythicization of significant scientific information. And, if that is the case, we need to peel off all of the ritual, the religious nonsense, the woo-woo stuff, and get down to business and discover this "science of the soul" in real terms.

Getting back to our subject here, this is a very curious puzzle about the carbon atom - the basic atom of our existence. When carbon bonds, result has been shown by Linus Pauling to be completely symmetrical. That is, the four bonds align towards the corners of a regular tetrahedron. It was deduced that, in addition to the atom "liking" to have its outer shell filled, the electrons like to be as far apart from each other in the bonded state as possible, which results in this arrangement.

Carbon atoms are very "happy" to form bonds with other carbon atoms. That is the basis of the famous benzene ring structure. The benzene ring is a particularly stable molecular form because the natural angles made by the four bonding carbon orbitals comfortably fit a six-sided structure - a HEXAGON!

Now, we could go on for a long time describing bonding and doing diagrams and all that. But, the essential thing to know here is this: the resulting molecules that are brought together in these chemical bonding processes have a particular SHAPE. The carbon bonds have plenty of flexibility, allowing bending, and there can be tangling and doubling back and forth to form very complex and very specific shapes. This bending and tangling brings different atoms of one side group into contact with others providing all kinds of opportunities for complex bonding. The natural angle between the carbon bonds also makes the benzene ring shape particularly favored and in a long carbon chain, the same natural angle can make the chain tend to loop round and round on itself. In such a case, however, the carbon atoms are not joined to close the ring, but can continue the polymer chain like the coils of a snake.

Carbohydrates, for example, are a group of substances based on the benzene ring structure. [...] A slightly different arrangement is another familiar biological substance, cellulose.

Now, there are six carbon atoms in your basic monosaccharide. But, some monosaccharides contain only five carbon atoms, four of which are connected to one oxygen atom in the from of a 5 sided ring. The fifth carbon atom is part of a side group, CH2OH. These compounds are called pentoses. One of them, exactly like glucose except for the missing carbon atom and its associated side groups, is called ribose. Another, similar to ribose except that one of its OH groups has lost the oxygen atom, leaving a simple CH bond behind, is called deoxy-ribose. This means that it is "ribose from which one of the oxygens has gone."

Deoxy-ribose is the basic unit that provides the name for deoxyribonucleic acid, or DNA, the fundamental molecule of life.

Sound like a "prime rib-ose?"

...And here's this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deoxyribose

D-2-Deoxyribose is a precursor to the nucleic acid DNA. 2-Deoxyribose is an aldopentose, that is, a monosaccharide with five carbon atoms and having an aldehyde functional group.

In aqueous solution, deoxyribose primarily exists as a mixture of three structures: the linear form H-(C=O)-(CH2)-(CHOH)3-H and two ring forms, deoxyribofuranose ("C3'-endo"), with a five-membered ring, and deoxyribopyranose ("C2'-endo"), with a six-membered ring. The latter form is predominant (whereas the C3'-endo form is favored for ribose).

Biological importance

As a component of DNA, 2-deoxyribose derivatives have an important role in biology.[3] The DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) molecule, which is the main repository of genetic information in life, consists of a long chain of deoxyribose-containing units called nucleotides, linked via phosphate groups. In the standard nucleic acid nomenclature, a DNA nucleotide consists of a deoxyribose molecule with an organic base (usually adenine, thymine, guanine or cytosine) attached to the 1' ribose carbon. The 5' hydroxyl of each deoxyribose unit is replaced by a phosphate (forming a nucleotide) that is attached to the 3' carbon of the deoxyribose in the preceding unit.

The backbone of RNA and DNA are structurally similar, but RNA is single stranded and, of course, it is built from ribose not deoxyribose. The absence of the 2' hydroxyl group in deoxyribose is apparently responsible for the increased mechanical flexibility of DNA compared to RNA, which allows it to assume the double-helix conformation, and also (in the eukaryotes) to be compactly coiled within the small cell nucleus. The double-stranded DNA molecules are also typically much longer than RNA molecules.
Other biologically important derivatives of deoxyribose include mono-, di-, and triphosphates, as well as 3'-5' cyclic monophosphates.

[edit]Biosynthesis
Deoxyribose is generated from ribose 5-phosphate by enzymes called ribonucleotide reductases. These enzymes catalyse the deoxygenation process.

...Wow, lots of primes there...and that "coiling" again...

Then I found this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiastic_structure

Chiastic structure (also called chiastic pattern or ring structure) is a literary structure used in ancient literatures, including epic poetry (Odyssey and Iliad); Scripture (the Torah, the Bible), as well as other pre-modern cultures' texts. Concepts or ideas are positioned in a special symmetric order or pattern in a chiastic structure to emphasize them.
For example, suppose that the first topic in a text is labeled by A, the second topic is labeled by B, and the third topic is labeled by C. If the topics in the text appear in the order ABC…CBA so that the first concept that comes up is also the last, the second is the second-to-last, and so on, the text is said to have a chiastic structure. Also, a chiastic structure can be of the form ABBAABB…ABBA.
Chiastic structures are sometimes called palistrophes,[1] chiasms, symmetric structures, ring structures, or concentric structures.

Why Chi?

Chi is a Greek letter that is shaped like an X. Chi is made up of two lines crossing each other, so the line that starts leftmost on top comes down and is rightmost on the bottom, and vice versa. If one thinks of the lines as concepts, one sees that concept A, which comes first, is also last, and concept B, which comes after A, comes before A. If one adds in more lines representing other concepts, one gets a chiastic structure with more concepts.

When read left to right, up to down, the first topic (A) is reiterated as the last, and the middle concept (B) appears twice in succession (Also, the middle concept could appear just once)

Chiastic structure as a mnemonic device

Oral literature is especially rich in chiastic structure, possibly as an aid in memorization. In his study of the Iliad and the Odyssey, Cedric Whitman, for instance, finds a chiastic structure "of the most amazing virtuosity" that simultaneously performed both aesthetic and mnemonic functions, permitting the oral poet to easily recall the basic formulae of the composition during performances.[2]

...and, of course, we're finding more in it... Some biblical examples are given but appeared rather weak to me; not surprising based on what we've discovered here about the plagiarized and piecemeal nature of those texts. These other examples were also given, which seemed more true to chiastic structure and perhaps of interest to us in other ways:

Beowulf
In literary texts with a possible oral origin, such as Beowulf, chiastic or ring structures are often found on an intermediate level, that is, between the (verbal and/or grammatical) level of chiasmus and the higher level of chiastic structure such as noted in the Torah. John D. Niles provides examples of chiastic figures on all three levels.[3] On the level of chiasmus, he notes that for instance ll. 12-19, the announcement of the birth of (Danish) Beowulf, are chiastic, more or less on the verbal level, that of chiasmus.[4] Then, each of the three main fights are organized chiastically, a chiastic structure on the level of verse paragraphs and shorter passages. For instance, the simplest of these three, the fight with Grendel, is schematized as follows:
A: Preliminaries
Grendel approaching
Grendel rejoicing
Grendel devouring Handscioh
B: Grendel's wish to flee ("fingers cracked")
C: Uproar in hall; Danes stricken with terror
HEOROT IN DANGER OF FALLING
C': Uproar in hall; Danes stricken with terror
B': "Joints burst"; Grendel forced to flee
A': Aftermath
Grendel slinking back toward fens
Beowulf rejoicing
Beowulf left with Grendel's arm[5]
Finally, Niles provides a diagram of the highest level of chiastic structure, the organization of the poem as a whole, in an introduction, three major fights with interludes before and after the second fight (with Grendel's mother), and an epilogue. To illustrate, he analyzes Prologue and Epilogue as follows:
Prologue
A: Panegyric for Scyld
B: Scyld's funeral
C: History of Danes before Hrothgar
D: Hrothgar's order to build Heorot
Epilogue
D': Beowulf's order to build his barrow
C': History of Geats after Beowulf ("messenger's prophecy")
B': Beowulf's funeral
A': Eulogy for Beowulf[6]
[edit]Paradise Lost
The overall chiastic structure of Milton's Paradise Lost is also of the ABC…CBA type:
A: Satan's sinful actions (Books 1-3)
B: Entry into Paradise (Book 4)
C: War in heaven (destruction) (Books 5-6)
C': Creation of the world (Books 7-8)
B': Loss of paradise (Book 9)
A': Humankind's sinful actions (Books 10-12)[7]

Now, coming back around ;D to the benzene ring structure. First there's this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzene

[...]

Here Kekulé spoke of the creation of the theory. He said that he had discovered the ring shape of the benzene molecule after having a reverie or day-dream of a snake seizing its own tail (this is a common symbol in many ancient cultures known as the Ouroboros or Endless knot). This vision, he said, came to him after years of studying the nature of carbon-carbon bonds. This was 7 years after he had solved the problem of how carbon atoms could bond to up to four other atoms at the same time.[...]
The cyclic nature of benzene was finally confirmed by the crystallographer Kathleen Lonsdale in 1929.

Then, to repeat part of the quote above:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/wave13g.htm

The natural angle between the carbon bonds also makes the benzene ring shape particularly favored and in a long carbon chain, the same natural angle can make the chain tend to loop round and round on itself. In such a case, however, the carbon atoms are not joined to close the ring, but can continue the polymer chain like the coils of a snake.

...And then:

http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=3914.0

02-02-23

A: Absolutely. Remember the Benzene Ring. Idea structure was seen first, then followed explication when application was realized.

[...]

(L) Maybe the key is the word ring. (A) No you see, what is mysterious, the fact that things are forming, okay it is discrete structure, numerical errors, roundings, you know all kinds of these artifacts. But, the fact that they look like three dimensional spirals - even if they are created in one dimension - I have no explanation. I don't even have an idea how to explain why would they ever create these spirals? Where are these extra dimensions coming from? I have no idea. (MN) Still, there is no application unless you can solve it.
A: Ring.
Q:(R) Yes, because its a cycle. It's what was said before. It's like a loop. (L) Well let me ask this--you've got it moving back and forth between two barriers right? Can you make the ends connect? (R) Yes. But then nothing happens because then it just moves and moves and moves, it is just the initial shape moving out and coming in another. So nothing happens the only thing... (M) The wave doesn't change. (R) Exactly. So it only happens when it has to react with a barrier. (L) Uh huh. (R) That's the only time it happens because that's what's causing... (B) Could the barrier represent a density? (R) It could, yeah, actually.
A: Double loop.
Q:(R) Double loop, yeah, exactly.[...] Yeah the thing is like this, if you have a packet of energy going like this and it meets a boundary, either it can fold up like that - just under its own pressure - and then spring back. Or, it can utilize the extra dimensions and coil. [...] And I think that it seems like the only reason it is manifesting is because the wave is hitting an obstacle. So, the 3rd dimension - it was always there as a possibility - but it didn't manifest until the wave hit an obstacle. So the obstacle, in effect, is creating the additional dimension. It was always there but it didn't manifest until an obstacle was put into the wave's path.
A: Consciousness energy directors.
Q:(R) Exactly. Because if the wave is hitting an obstacle, if it just follows mechanics, it's going fold up because that's the law. But, if you have consciousness interacting with the energy, then it can say "hey look it is more efficient if you don't fold up, it is more efficient if you utilize this extra dimension, because there is then less pressure in the wave if you are using this extra dimension." But you need that consciousness to kind of say: "hey look there is this extra dimension that you can utilize." And it has to say how to utilize it because it has to choose a direction to start folding into. (B) If our consciousness defines the parameters of 3rd density, could the barriers on either side of the wave represent the barriers of the outside parameters of 3rd density which causes this continual looping back and forth? And it may be doing something else in a different density that doesn't have those barriers?
A: Frequency resonance envelope.
Q: (R) Exactly, it makes total sense. So frequency resonance envelopes are realms. And our program shows that the only time interesting things happen to a wave is when it hits an obstacle. And it only manifests the extra dimension if someone helps the wave to choose which way to start folding out into the extra dimension. So if densities in effect are frequency resonance envelopes, which exist as obstacles, that waves of energy can resonate within...yeah exactly...that makes kind of sense. (JN) What if the level of consciousness is the barrier? (R) Yeah exactly. Consciousness energy directors, and the more awareness you have the more possibilities you can see to direct the energy. (JN) The less obstruction. (R) Yeah, or you can choose this... (V) You say you believe something because it's the law, but... (R) Yeah, because those are the parameters that you see, but the more awareness you have, the more you see, the more you can find, then you can know dimensions that you can escape into. You have the box, you say it's closed, we can't get out of it. But if you have more awareness, you can say "well there's some other dimension out of the box that we can use." Do I make sense?
A: You are going in the right direction...
Q: [...] (R) Okay, well this makes sense. So the basic concept to recap is that densities are frequency resonance envelopes in the same way that the barriers in our program are barriers. We have modeled densities on a computer program. Densities are envelopes. Frequency Resonance Envelopes. You have energy bouncing back and forth and without conscious directing of that energy it's not going to utilize anything more than the paths that are kind of obvious - the default. But as soon as you start to direct that energy, you can direct it in such a way that it exceeds the envelope.

...So is this ring structure in the Odyssey reflective of that? To elaborate, perhaps it's suggestive of how our density is defined by the same themes looping around on themselves. We've just got what we see, believe, and think here and that defines the limits/barriers of our reality/density. So perhaps getting beyond this density requires new "themes" beyond what we have here...


Pushing the boundaries ;)
Renee
 
reborn said:
...So is this ring structure in the Odyssey reflective of that? To elaborate, perhaps it's suggestive of how our density is defined by the same themes looping around on themselves. We've just got what we see, believe, and think here and that defines the limits/barriers of our reality/density. So perhaps getting beyond this density requires new "themes" beyond what we have here...

Another excellent example of following the thread and making connections between "as above, so below" and inside and outside and so on.

Perhaps our dietary adventures as discussed on the "Life Without Bread" thread have more implications than we imagine?
 
Reborn, you blew my mind :D :D :clap: :thup:

You're references to the mosaic also brought this to mind:

Laura said:
Q: (T) Since you are riding this wave, in order to communicate, since the wave is what you are using to focus this contact with, and you are, whoever you may be at whatever point the wave is, you gave Barbara Marciniak information under the name "Pleiadians". You are telling us this. Have you told the other people, such as Barbara Marciniak, that you are contacting other people?

A: No.

Q: (L) So, Barbara may not know that the contacts are the same only under a different name?

A: No.

Q: (L) Is it because she didn't ask?

A: Progressive information. Also, system is like mosaic.

Q: (L) Does this mean that different people get different pieces of the mosaic?

A: Yes.

Q: (T) But, you have told us that you have contacted others under other names?

A: Yes.

And this from EmeraldHope earlier on in the thread:

EmeraldHope said:
I have a question that is possibly out in left field so I apologize in advance if it is. This book is next in my cue and I have been following the thread here. However, from this story springs one of my favorite stories, and I just have to ask for an educated opinion here.

From Aristophane's speech in Plato's Symposium, it is said that Ephialtes and Otus really referred to the "humanity" that existed before they were cut down by the gods for challenging them. They were cut in two, separated from their other half. From a symbolic perspective, especially when one factors in cataclysm and what possibly happened to humanity then, I cannot help but wonder about it.

So I guess my question is, is Aristophane's speech in any way relative or applicable?

Here is Aristophane's speech: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4paSMqKYXtY&feature=related

Also made me think of this:
Laura said:
December 10, 1994

Frank, Laura, Terry and Jan.

Q: (L) Was the DNA change that we are experiencing programmed into us so that after so many generations these changes would just sort of kick in?

A: Close.

Q: (L) So, we all selected certain bodies before we incarnated that would be prime for this programming?

A: Are you ready to be hermaphrodites?

Q: (L) Is that what we are going to be?

A: Wait and see.

Also this from Meager1:
Meager1 said:
"We are you in the future." What does that "you" mean? Based on the answers the Cs have given, it is a number of individual "consciousness units" that are members of a particular soul group. (They may or may not be incarnated.) Thus, channeling the Cs would probably depend on whether or not that individual is a member of that particular soul group. The Cs have also said that the constellations in the sky are information about various soul groups, so there are clearly others.

I don`t yet fully understand myself what I am going to try to say, so if this sounds off the wall then I apologize. Ever since I first started reading about gods/goddesses I couldn`t help but think that they were somehow just aspects or attributes of some "special" kind of humans.

That somehow if enough people got together, all with the same attributes/spirit, and cultivated certain ideals to become something pure with good intent, then this attribute/ideal, becomes a separate energy, or force, or what we would call, or maybe the ancients called a god or goddess, this being some "energy form" separate from, yet connected to the humans that "created" it through their own effort.

It seems that any clash of the "gods" would be a kind of battle of the wills, or the attributes/spirit, or intent of one group of people opposing another, in another dimensions,or otherwise.

Of course this doesn't work well when you take into account the 4D aspect of it, or that the gods were aliens etc. But I can`t help thinking that there is more involving the "people" themselves and some spiritual energy or actual connection to these energy forms that they actually possessed, or controlled then we know about.

I really don`t know where I was going with this, so sorry for the extra noise if it`s no where.

Reminds me of the concept of egregors. Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egregore defines it as:
an occult concept representing a "thoughtform" or "collective group mind", an autonomous psychic entity made up of, and influencing, the thoughts of a group of people.
[...]
The word "egregore" derives from the Greek word, ἐγρήγοροι (egrḗgoroi), meaning "watchers" (also transliterated "grigori"). The word appears in the Septuagint translation of the Book of Lamentations,[1] as well as the Book of Jubilees and the Book of Enoch.
[...]
Gaetan Delaforge, in Gnosis magazine in 1987, defines an egregore as a kind of group mind which is created when people consciously come together for a common purpose.
[...]
The result of a synergy of thought could be the most concise description of this state of mind.
[...]
The notion of "egregor" also appears in Daniil Andreyev's Roza Mira, where it represents the shining cloud-like spirit associated with the Church.

Learning is fun :D :D so keep :rockon: guys and gals.
 
Laura said:
Perhaps our dietary adventures as discussed on the "Life Without Bread" thread have more implications than we imagine?

I am convinced they do, but I am having trouble following this topic. The ideas don't sink in quickly or easily. There was also the material about symmetry in Deep Nutrition. That mathematical information seems more approachable (to me) and I have bookmarked it to go back and try to understand it when I can.

It seems like there could be a rather limited number of basic laws that apply across everything. Hmmm, where have I read that before?
 
Approaching Infinity said:
Laura said:
When the tradition surfaced in the Greek world, it retained the account of struggles between successive generations of gods. But a key element was now missing. No longer was the battle arena occupied by members of opposing families representing opposing forces of nature. The contestants all belonged to a single family line. That reflects a major shift in the tradition, and a major narrowing of its limits, from a cosmogonically to a generationally based conflict.

{Is that necessarily true? If Clube is right, all the "gods" were born from a single giant comet... So perhaps claiming two families is the corruption?}

One thing that stood out for me is that in the Hittite myths, the netherworld gods were the baddies and the sky gods were the ones everyone was rooting for, seemingly. The evil snake monster rising to do battle with the storm god makes me think of an electric connection between earth and comet. In a sense, it could be interpreted as the earth/netherworld gods doing battle with the sky gods (comet). The comet may break up, being seen as a temporary "defeat". Perhaps the two families came about because of this? Or maybe the distortion is seeing the sky gods as the ones "winning" the battle and that being a "good" thing (wouldn't the destruction of a comet be perceived as a good thing, if they were doom-bringers)? I guess what I'm wondering is what these people actually thought about the comet(s) they saw. Were they benevolent gods popping by for a visit, but prompting the evil netherworld gods to put up a fight? Or were they malevolent gods, bad omens, things to be really afraid of? Clube suggests the latter, but maybe I'm just not reading the Hittite stuff the right way...

Curious that plagues were equated with Gods. All violent powers that were capable of killing humans en masse had appropriate Gods, then the other side miraculous, life-giving forces of Nature - not under human control - are equated with Gods. Was this because most people had lack of understanding, ignorant, so they were informed via God-tales by selfish priests, also by those wiser men, who understood more of the situation: Totus mundus in maligno positus est?

What if the Gods described in Odyssey, Yahweh in OT and similar curiously avenging types have actually arrived to the general psychic realm of Earth on a comet? As non-wanted invaders with super-human intelligence, yet childish, selfish, conquering, destroying, scheming overindulging in their STS-potential. What if the old, indigenous Gods of the Earth area, who were guiding humans in harmony during Eden and the Golden Age were driven off their territories - i mean the psychic realms connected to humans - lost the battle and the alien invader-Gods won.

Could be the cause of the fighting going on in 4D and resultant havoc in weather. The "Help is on the way" by the C's could be friendly forces of elder, sober and sane Gods arriving, riding the wave and comets, to help the old Gods in the fight to gain back this Earth realm and re-establish the Golden Age.

In the meantime all psychopaths and craziness seen today and cyclically in the history might be the result of the mad influence of these childish-selfish alien invader-Gods who suggested, injected madness and extreme selfishness into human minds?

This would explain the extreme savageness of the Gods and their help to humans in achieving massacres in Odyssey in wars. The identity of the benevolent old Gods of Eden and the wicked invader-Gods might have been mixed up during history and have been written in a mixed, partly understood form in Odyssey, as who is who: Athena, Posseidon, Zeus for example, all helping, but killing as well for their own mystical purposes. The writers of Odyssey guessing-suggesting and trying to identify some Gods as benevolent, but not having enough info, may have mixed them up, like Apollo God of music, poetry, plague, oracles, sun, medicine, light and knowledge. Athena lending power to Odysseus and his father in killing their enemies (humans) in one part of the story and showering glamour over Odysseus to appear as godlike in other parts.

What is with that awful lot of mind/thought-influencing scheming of Athena? The world of Odyssey appears very constricted and limited in the way of free-will, a dangerous world for humans to live in, with a lot of curious miracles there, that might not be helping, but rather being in the way? Calypso's Island, Circes Island could be off-limit domains of alien invader-Gods, their intrusions into Earth territory. The Sirens too sound rather strange - out of place - , looking at all this from the perspective, how these scheming "Gods" were not there in the Golden Age.
 
I apologize if this has been posted, but i found a good link for the free ebook.
http://www.falbepublishing.com/ebook_classics/odyssey_ebook.html
 
davey72 said:
probably a stupid question, but who wrote it?

Doing a little search on the web, you could have found the answer : :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odyssey
 
Back
Top Bottom