Sumer: the "black-headed" vs. the "red-faced"

[Nungali]

15 hours ago, Everything said:

This is so not important because you have acces to knowledge which is so far far and faaar and waaaaaaaaay greater than all of this. Evermore being and becoming here and now for you, as you are an inseperable and unconditionally worthy extension of all of it evermore being and becoming evermore HERE AND NOW! 

 

What was is not as it was before it was now. You have find the thought and perspective which is fully in good feelingly positive emotionally felt allowed harmony and allignment with your own ever expanding greater non-physical consciousness, all the way to the ever expanding Source of All Creation, to allow your fully truely allowed by you to be fully realised by you thoughts of full realisation. BECAUSE THE PAST IS NOT OUT THERE, ITS RIGHT HERE AND NOW EVERMORE FOR YOU, and you co-create all of it in full harmony and allignment with the Source of All Creation. So it is so much more satisfying if you thus then flow in full harmony and alignment with your own evermore greater allowed realisation of all that you ever want to be do or have evermore effortlessly and joyously and naturally and ongoingly here and now. As all that you truely are being and becoming evermore here and now. That can felt by you evermore fully and ongoingly better feelingly, joyously effortlessly, naturally, to allow your own evermore greater allowed realisation of all of it evermore. Naturally and effortlessly.

 

 

 

 

.....  yep   .....

 

hippies .......  I knew it  ! 

 

 

- I have one of those too dude !  ;

 

 

By unveiling, we reflect.

The goal of a resonance cascade is to plant the seeds of grace rather than bondage. Beauty requires exploration.

We must bless ourselves and empower others.

The world is electrified with bio-electricity. This life is nothing short of an evolving fusion of high-frequency karma. Today, science tells us that the essence of nature is choice.

Our conversations with other adventurers have led to a redefining of pseudo-karmic consciousness. Throughout history, humans have been interacting with the universe via frequencies. Who are we? Where on the great story will we be aligned?

To engage with the journey is to become one with it. We exist as bio-electricity. Nothing is impossible.

The quantum matrix is approaching a tipping point.

Manna is a constant. Potentiality is the knowledge of knowledge, and of us. Consciousness consists of electrical impulses of quantum energy. “Quantum” means a maturing of the enlightened.

 

https://sebpearce.com/bullshit/

[Everything]

3 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

 

.....  yep   .....

 

hippies .......  I knew it  ! 

 

 

- I have one of those too dude !  ;

 

 

By unveiling, we reflect.

The goal of a resonance cascade is to plant the seeds of grace rather than bondage. Beauty requires exploration.

We must bless ourselves and empower others.

The world is electrified with bio-electricity. This life is nothing short of an evolving fusion of high-frequency karma. Today, science tells us that the essence of nature is choice.

Our conversations with other adventurers have led to a redefining of pseudo-karmic consciousness. Throughout history, humans have been interacting with the universe via frequencies. Who are we? Where on the great story will we be aligned?

To engage with the journey is to become one with it. We exist as bio-electricity. Nothing is impossible.

The quantum matrix is approaching a tipping point.

Manna is a constant. Potentiality is the knowledge of knowledge, and of us. Consciousness consists of electrical impulses of quantum energy. “Quantum” means a maturing of the enlightened.

 

https://sebpearce.com/bullshit/

It's funny, someone said something like this to me before on these forums. I think it might've been you. 

 

So why does this feel better to you, emotionally. Keep expanding upon it. Keep following this trail of guidance of your emotional guidance system, as your unique path of least resistance, to your full bown allowed realisation of all that you truely want to be do or have. 

 

And again, you don't have to be vague about it, unless you want to. Unless it feels better for you to do say. Then that means it is your path of least resistance. So stay true to your heart always and you will find that which you are truely looking for, as in all of it. 

 

So, this whole quantum thing is not really conducive or reflective of the path of least resistance. It is not a naturally felt allowance. It is not capable of naturally and effortlessly balancing itself out, to allow oneself to effortlessly come to full allowed realisation. Not like your physical body can, if you will listen to your heart, meaning co-create consciously and in alignment and harmony with your own ever expanding greater non-physical consciousness. Then you can truely be, do or have anything you want in full natural and effortless and joyously felt co-creative harmony and alignment with the ever expanding Source of All Creation. 

 

But to stay back on topic, you look at the past, thinking that the past is something that happened, that you have to find out what happened. But it's not like that at all. Because you cannot find anything unless you already have allowed yourself to become it. And that means, you have to allow yourself to come into allowed realisation of your own greater non-physical consciousness, and then you will simply find evidence, unconditionally, meaning, under any and all conditions, regardless of any and all conditions. You will come to find purely realised thought, non-contradicted thought, fully allowed by you to be fully realised thought. That includes everything, and all perspectives, being allowed to be brought to full blown allowed realisation by you, for you, as you, with you. Being and becoming evermore here and now. 

 

Because it is not somewhere hidden or in the past. It is everywhere and in everything. And you co-create all of it joyously, in full harmony and alignment with the ever expanding Source of All Creation, infinite intelligence, eternal wisdom and unconditional love. So you not only realise all that you have been, and where you are, and where you will go. You allow your evermore realisation evermore here and now, of all that you truely are being and becoming evermore here and now. 

 

And by that I don't mean that someone else gets to decide for you. It means that you decide together, with your own greater non-physical consciousness. More freely, more fully, more consciously, more really. So that you can be the witness of those thoughts turning to things. So that you can witness how unconditionally loved you truely are. Fully allowed by you, to be fully realised by you, pure uncontradicted thought. Non-resisted thought. Freely chosen thought, together with your greater non-physical consciousness, who knows all that you want to be do or have, and even more so, is being and becoming the evermoreness of all of it evermore here and now, ongoingly, eternally, ever expanding, infinitely, unconditionally, energy motionally. And offers you relentless guidance all day every day, all night and every night, always here and now, as your unique path of least resistance to your full blown allowed realisation within and without of any and all things that can or will ever be of any value or meaning to you, as your unique emotional guidance system. 

 

So it will always stay unrealised by you. Forever. Untill you allow it for yourself to be realised by you. By simply allowing yourself to feel better. And focus in harmony and alignment with your own greate non-physical consciousness. And love the infinite and eternal value of your emotional guidance system evermore here and now. Why? Because you have always been, are, and will always be, unconditionally worthy of all of it, evermore, here and now. Where all that exists exists. And when all that exists exists. And is being and becoming evermore. In full harmony and alignment with the ever expanding source of all creation, of which you aswell are an inseperable extension of it. And if you do not tap into your true nature of being. Nothing happens. Nothing changes. Not because you are disconnected. But because you simply block your own evermore relentless allowed realisation, of all that you truely are being and becoming evermore here and now, by simple thoughts that you think. Which are self contradictory thoughts. This gives you a temporary experience of negative emotion, or no emotion at all. And then that's it. It will just always stay a thought. And then you will call it bullsht. 

But your soul never calls it bullsht. Because it exists evermore here and now for you. And you are unconditionally loved. So loved, that you are allowed to believe that you are not loved. And thus, what is eternity but a blink of an eye? 

 

So you can realise, that you don't need to die, before you allow yourself to come to full allowed realisation of all that you truely are being and becoming evermore effortlessly, joyously and freely, here and now. 

 

You are simply free to be, do or have whatever you want. And so to also value your negative emotions. For when do you know more clearly what it is you truely want, when you are in the moment so clearly knowing what it is you truely don't want? If only you knew how easy it was to feel better. Then you would never ever judge the eternal and infinite value of each new here and now moment, of a new existance unlike any that has ever been before, or ever will be like it ever again, and again, a new here and now, and again. Evermore being and becoming evermore here and now. In full harmony and alignment with the Ever Expanding Source of All Creation, of which you are an inseperable, unconditionally loved and worthy extension of it evermore here and now. Where all of your power always is. All of your knowledge always is. All of your freedom always is. All of your joy always is. All of your love always is. For the mere purpose of the joyous life experience that is who it is and what it is you truely are being and becoming evermore here and now. For your evermore allowed re-membrance of it. Re-collection of it. Realisation of it. Co-creation with it. With the whole of all that you truely are. Being and becoming evermore here and now. Physical and non-physical, hand in hand, as a total full being. A totally fully allowed by you to be fully realised by you evermore ongoingly effortlessly and joyously and freely being of evermore becoming here and now. Naturally. And effortlessly. As all that you truely are being and becoming evermore here and now.

[Phoenix3]

@Nungali didn’t the indo-europeans come from western Kazakhstan in 2000BC (the Andronovo culture, not the  Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex culture. These two cultures were found to have been two different cultures of different origins)? From there, they introduced the chariot to China, India and other civilisations within the next 500 years. So surely the western Kazakhstan area is the origin of that civilisation? 

 

If the Rigveda was composed in 1500BC in northern India, and the Indo-europeans originated from the Western Kazakhstan steppe in 2000BC, then why doesn’t the Rigveda and Zoroastrianism mention this area?

Edited October 14, 2019 by Phoenix3

[Nungali]

I am sorry , Everything says  I can no longer answer questions about the past until  I  'become it '   .

 

 

 

 

This guy even gives a lengthy 'discourse'   on a   suck in

 

(try clicking on the link dude ! )

 

https://sebpearce.com/bullshit/

[Nungali]

5 hours ago, Phoenix3 said:

@Nungali didn’t the indo-europeans come from western Kazakhstan in 2000BC (the Andronovo culture, not the  Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex culture.

 

Probably  .   But I was talking about Zoroastrians and 'proto-Zoroastrian'   culture  not  Indo - Europeans . 

 

 

 

Quote

 

 

These two cultures were found to have been two different cultures of different origins)?

 

Certainly . That is if you mean Andronovo culture and  Zoroastrian  culture, they are different cultures and have different origins.

 

 

Quote

 

 

 

From there, they introduced the chariot to China, India and other civilisations within the next 500 years. So surely the western Kazakhstan area is the origin of that civilisation? 

 

It is the origin of early Kazakhstan  culture and Andronovo culture ....    if that is what you mean by 'that civilisation' .   Kazakhstan is not the origin of BMAC culture.   BMAC is a recently discovered 'lost civilisation' ;

 

http://discovermagazine.com/2006/nov/ancient-towns-excavated-turkmenistan

 

 

Quote

 

If the Rigveda was composed in 1500BC in northern India, and the Indo-europeans originated from the Western Kazakhstan steppe in 2000BC, then why doesn’t the Rigveda and Zoroastrianism mention this area?

 

 

What 'this area' ?  The BMAC area ?    They do mention the  BMAC area , but they dont  have the same names we do now, of course.  There is a wealth of material  about the  'old rivers'   that proponents of an IE incursion into NW India  cite .... and there is a wealth of the opposite , claiming those rivers are in India  ( see the 'Out of India Theory,  {they claim India is the origin of IE}  - sponsored by the  Indian Nationalist  Party)  . .

 

And in the Zoroastrian scriptures  ;

 

http://www.avesta.org/vendidad/vd1sbe.htm

 

For latter research ( post Sarianidi)  on BMAC  ;

 

https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780873655453

Edited October 14, 2019 by Nungali

[Everything]

3 hours ago, Nungali said:

I am sorry , Everything says  I can no longer answer questions about the past until  I  'become it '   .

 

 

 

 

This guy even gives a lengthy 'discourse'   on a   suck in

 

(try clicking on the link dude ! )

 

https://sebpearce.com/bullshit/

Well untill you become it ok, but also untill they become present. And it is not that you cannot talk about your perspective of your here and now. You are free to do that. But only when you withdraw from the lens of your physical extension and then also reemerge fully back into physical, along with all those which also do so. Then it's not that you will be able to talk about them. You will then be able, you will then ALLOW YOURSELF, TO TALK TO THEM! LITERALLY PHYSICALLY. YOU WILL TALK TO THEM I AM NOT JOKING. 

 

Edit: altho it is kind of funny if you only realise it for the first time. 

Edited October 14, 2019 by Everything

[Taomeow]

@Everything A request: could you kindly move your contributions to this thread to a separate thread of your own?  Clearly you have much interest in talking about something of personal significance to you --

 

which, however, has nothing whatsoever to do with the very specific subject under discussion as offered by the OP in this thread and contributed to by others -- to wit, Sumer and the musings on the origins and repercussions of civilization viewed through the prism of its history and legacy. 

 

I would be very grateful if you do. Many thanks in advance.   

[Nungali]

Another thing I think we need to look at, as well as  agriculture is animal domestication.   Peoples that had 'simple' , proto-farming or 'dry agriculture' seemed to have more egalitarian cultures. But people that used irrigation and domesticated animals, less so.

 

I cant see how irrigation could change human consciousness away from an egalitarian framework , but animal domestication could .

 

There are two types basically ;  the 'companion or household  animal ' (like the dog or cat ) and the 'working animal' . I think that the 2nd type has a lot to do with the development of slavery- the antithesis of egalitarian .  The harnessing of animals to do the work of humans is similar to slavery, and as I have noted before, perhaps some 'bright spark' in the past observed; ' If I can get an animal to do that .... why not another human ? ' The process is the same ; capture, 'hobbling' ,  training and forcing to work under the whip  for the bare exchange of basic food and shelter (to keep your 'investment ' alive) .

 

For example, the Australian Aboriginal had proto / dry 'farming'  ( some basic 'irrigation' , mostly for eel aquaculture ) but no domestic work animals (they had dingos and pelicans for pets , but no 'slave' animals ) and never developed a sacrificial  culture or slavery.

 

So that dynamic, along with the abilities  that allowed raid and run ( mostly horse riding and chariots ) basically led some people to develop a system of being 'over' others .    Even the original 'Caste ' system ( Varna) was based on profession or work and was not hierarchical , it wasnt until much later that the other caste system ( 'Jati' ) based on ethnic division of clan and tribe that notions of superiority  / inferiority entered into it .

 

Agriculture and animal domestication have made some serious impacts on the human condition

 

http://discovermagazine.com/1987/may/02-the-worst-mistake-in-the-history-of-the-human-race

[Apech]

1 hour ago, Nungali said:

Another thing I think we need to look at, as well as  agriculture is animal domestication.   Peoples that had 'simple' , proto-farming or 'dry agriculture' seemed to have more egalitarian cultures. But people that used irrigation and domesticated animals, less so.

 

I cant see how irrigation could change human consciousness away from an egalitarian framework , but animal domestication could .

...

 

Actually I can think of some arguments where irrigation is a technology which would require a deal of social organisation - and also engineering skills.  I don't know about Sumer but the Indus Valley had some quite complex irrigation (and may well have died out because of their failure i.e. the drying out of the Saraswati etc.)  Egypt of course had a kind of natural irrigation with the Nile inundation - but even here things like measuring out fields post flood brought in maths and surveying skills.

 

Pastoralism on the other hand exists in 'non-civilised' culture (if I may call them this) - and obviously doesn't require large numbers of people living in close proximity all year.

 

 

[Nungali]

In the link I gave above      

https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780873655453

 

Hiebert  cites the  south  Central Asian oasis complex     as originating in the far eastern ( present day  Iranian ) foothills going into the Kopet Dag  ( 'dry irrigation  supplemented by hunting and gathering  out in the oasis alluvial fans  (  'thickets',  'wilderness' , 'wetlands ) . As their numbers increased and the dry agriculture method  could not keep up with their increase, they started clearing the oasis and developing a different type of irrigated agriculture .  Then things really 'took off' .

 

Here, it appears,   that people didnt develop  irrigation and  then  that allowed them to increase population - population increased and they developed irrigation to be able to feed more people .  

 

Regarding 'aggression'  and oppressing others in  some  societies :

 

Maybe people 'living in close proximity'  ( and having to dig out those damn canals constantly    )   made people  grumpy   ? 

 

I know it makes me grumpy  .... not enough to go oppress the neighbours though .

 

.

Edited October 15, 2019 by Nungali

[Apech]

5 hours ago, Nungali said:

In the link I gave above      

https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780873655453

 

Hiebert  cites the  south  Central Asian oasis complex     as originating in the far eastern ( present day  Iranian ) foothills going into the Kopet Dag  ( 'dry irrigation  supplemented by hunting and gathering  out in the oasis alluvial fans  (  'thickets',  'wilderness' , 'wetlands ) . As their numbers increased and the dry agriculture method  could not keep up with their increase, they started clearing the oasis and developing a different type of irrigated agriculture .  Then things really 'took off' .

 

Here, it appears,   that people didnt develop  irrigation and  then  that allowed them to increase population - population increased and they developed irrigation to be able to feed more people .  

 

Regarding 'aggression'  and oppressing others in  some  societies :

 

Maybe people 'living in close proximity'  ( and having to dig out those damn canals constantly    )   made people  grumpy   ? 

 

I know it makes me grumpy  .... not enough to go oppress the neighbours though .

 

.

 

 

Egg, chicken, chicken, egg.  But let's get back to the subject.

 

I think perhaps the dual concepts of boundaries and ownership makes people protective, grumpy, fearful and aggressive.  This could be wrong but it seems right to me.  So there's some kind of iterative effect from some agriculture and settled communities based on land - which has knock on consequences.  I think it is proven that birth rates and populations boomed under Neolithic farming - once that happens the pressure becomes to expand and take more territory (from hunter gatherers - who instinctively just move on giving up territory to the farmers and so on.  I saw a video which suggested that assimilation rates were about three generations - which is quite a short period of time.  On the other hand pastoralists and farmers had a semi-symbiotic relationship where they would herd their animals onto harvested land so they would eat the stubble and shit on the fields - or so according to Romila Thapal.

 

 

[CloudHands]

On 14/10/2019 at 11:07 PM, Nungali said:

I cant see how irrigation could change human consciousness away from an egalitarian framework , but animal domestication could .

 

 

The notion of stock. To have something valuable vs not to have it, specialy in needy time (winter) implies power over someone(s). Also a force to keep it safe...

Cereals are not so far from money you can quantify it rather easily. Rice has been collected for a very long time as a tax by zen Buddhist.

Edited October 21, 2019 by CloudHands

[Nungali]

30 minutes ago, CloudHands said:

 

The notion of stock. To have something valuable vs not to have it, specialy in needy time (winter) implies power over someone(s). Also a force to keep it safe...

 

Thats interesting !    The value in an agricultural society is stored goods  and yes , it may need a 'force to keep it safe'. Where as the value for a hunter gatherer society is  'stored' out in the environment  and what is needed is to keep that  environment  safe and supplying  through a system of law and allowance depending on environmental factors .

 

 

30 minutes ago, CloudHands said:

Cereals are not so far from money you can quantify it rather easily. Rice has been collected for a very long time as a tax by zen Buddhist.

 

Not just 'Zen Buddhists '   ;

 

 

Under the Tokugawa shogunate of the Edo period (1603–1868) of Japanese history, each feudal domain had an assessment of its potential income known as kokudaka which in part determined its order of precedence at the Shogunal court. The smallest kokudaka to qualify the fief-holder for the title of daimyō was 10,000 koku (worth ¥705,528,600 in 2016^[30]) and Kaga han, the largest (other than that of the shōgun), was called the "million-koku domain". Its holdings totaled around 1,025,000 koku (worth ¥72.3 billion in 2016). Many samurai, including hatamoto, received stipends in koku, while a few received salaries instead.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koku

[liminal_luke]

...

Edited October 21, 2019 by liminal_luke

[CloudHands]

12 hours ago, Nungali said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koku

 

Yep It was an example, so in french middle age the tax payed by peasants was the "dîme". Of course it applied on the crops. And grains are the stock-able crops.

[Taomeow]

And now we come to the Sumerian abstract counting system, the beginning of the writing system.  The character illustrated below means "one."  It was produced by firmly pressing a blunt reed into soft damp clay, then directing it down with decreasing pressure. 

 

The same technique, only with an ink-dipped brush on paper, is still used in Chinese calligraphy (if done the classical way).  And when I was being taught to write in the first grade, we also still had the classical calligraphy style pen-and-ink requirements and strict demands on the fine motor skills that had to be developed in order to do it right.  Pretty soon abandoned though, to conform to the newer way that no longer expects, much less encourages, a child's brain to develop in harmonious coordination with her hand and the rest of her body.  Aside from calligraphy which was the last opportunity for something like brain-hand coordination development in children who were no longer making arrowheads or fishing hooks or weaved baskets, etc., for a very long time, the rest of such developmental opportunities had been long eradicated from schools even before they did away with calligraphy, so in a math class children were mocked if they used their fingers to assist counting, and when reading silently, harassed for moving their lips until they stopped, to make sure that the brain and the facial responsiveness/expressivity are properly discoordinated as well...  but don't let me digress.      

 

The same symbol that meant "one" to Sumerians also meant "sixty" (in the appropriate context.)  That's because sixty was their understanding of a full circle, perfect completion, the end that was the new beginning -- after 60 the cycle started again, and 60 was the same as 1.  (Visualize an analog clock, please.)  The human life was calculated as two complete cycles of 60 and a normal life span deemed to be 120.  Of course most people no longer lived out this full lifespan, for reasons the whole thread is about.  Sumerians didn't count the age of people in years though, only the age of cattle was counted like that.  As for humans, they merely differentiated between several life stages that didn't exactly correspond to any particular specific ages: inseparable from mother; young; mature and in full strength and vigor; on decline of strength; weakened by old age, illness or hard life.

 

   

Edited October 23, 2019 by Taomeow

[Taomeow]

Some Akkadian words still sound familiar to an English speaker.  E.g.,

elat — higher; beyond
elâtu — higher end; the sky
elûti — high; upper

 

Elate, elated, elevated...  elite...  Enlil (n was not pronounced in Sumerian or Akkadian) 

 

 

Edited October 25, 2019 by Taomeow

[Taomeow]

Ninutra vs. Imdugud (or, to Akkadians, Anzû.)  Ninutra was Enlil's son, and Imdugud was a son of Sirius conceived of Water and Earth.  He was depicted as a huge bird (sometimes described as made of thunder clouds and not unlike Zhuangzi's Peng bird in appearance and size) and could breathe fire and water.  Later it was left up to Western dragons to breathe fire, and Chinese ones, mists and fogs, but the original could do both.  Sometimes Imdugud was also depicted as a lion-headed eagle, or else a bird with a human head. 

 

By the time Ninutra was refurbished as St.George and Imdugud/Anzû was demoted to a dragon, the latter apparently started eating princesses, which is why St.George had to kill it.  But the earlier story is not about anything this base.  Imdugud didn't have an appetite for princesses, he was interested in something a lot loftier.  To wit, he stole the Tablet of Destinies, which belonged to Enlil and had the ultimate and final law inscribed on it, proclaiming whoever possesses it the absolute ruler of the Universe.  Ninutra demanded his father's property back and fought and killed the son of Sirius toward retrieving it.   

 

So, maybe not St.George and the dragon after all.  Maybe even the monotheistic god himself who was only some three, four thousand years away, and his winged adversary who challenged his reign and aimed for his office.  Hard to tell.  Every Sumerian story seems to have been re-told.  I don't think there's "myths" surviving millennia that are entirely made up.  Made-up stories are short-lived.  I've no memory of what MSM news was about six months ago.  Something that can persevere for six thousand years is a different kind of story methinks.  I believe it's only prudent to look to persistent, most tenacious myths when trying to figure out what really went down at the dawn of our unreliable (too many ulterior motives behind rewriting every word of it countless times) civilized history.    

 

 

Edited October 28, 2019 by Taomeow

[Apech]

On 10/28/2019 at 5:48 AM, Taomeow said:

.... 

 

So, maybe not St.George and the dragon after all.  Maybe even the monotheistic god himself who was only some three, four thousand years away, and his winged adversary who challenged his reign and aimed for his office.  Hard to tell.  Every Sumerian story seems to have been re-told.  I don't think there's "myths" surviving millennia that are entirely made up.  Made-up stories are short-lived.  I've no memory of what MSM news was about six months ago.  Something that can persevere for six thousand years is a different kind of story methinks.  I believe it's only prudent to look to persistent, most tenacious myths when trying to figure out what really went down at the dawn of our unreliable (too many ulterior motives behind rewriting every word of it countless times) civilized history.    

 

 

 

Order vs chaos?

[Taomeow]

5 hours ago, Apech said:

 

Order vs chaos?

 

I've never observed chaos in nature.  Only in ordered societies.  In nature order arises from chaos because it's simply its inherent property.  Chaos is what chaos does -- and what it does is order. 

 

Whereas in unnatural, civilized/artificial conditions, i.e. conditions of domestication that abolish natural processes, chaos ensues with unnatural frequency precisely because natural processes of order-making have been cut at the root.  Hence the need for consolidation of authoritarian centralized power, to impose some artificial order as the ruler sees fit.  Whether the dragon stands for that natural order destroyed by the centralized authority or merely for the competition (a power grab is always competed against by someone who feels as strong, or stronger, to impose his own order as he sees fit), I don't know.  History is written by the winners of those pissing contests.  And before there were winners and losers, before writing, before the scribes were instructed what kind of narrative to write (or else), there was nothing to lie about.    

 

But another possibility is, it's all real.  It is told as it happened.  There were dragons and other genetically modified war machines,  originating somewhere on a different planet, occasionally fighting for this one, attempting hostile takeovers, one of them ultimately succeeding, and life on our planet behaving as their involuntary employee ever since.   

[Apech]

1 hour ago, Taomeow said:

 

I've never observed chaos in nature.  Only in ordered societies.  In nature order arises from chaos because it's simply its inherent property.  Chaos is what chaos does -- and what it does is order. 

 

Whereas in unnatural, civilized/artificial conditions, i.e. conditions of domestication that abolish natural processes, chaos ensues with unnatural frequency precisely because natural processes of order-making have been cut at the root.  Hence the need for consolidation of authoritarian centralized power, to impose some artificial order as the ruler sees fit.  Whether the dragon stands for that natural order destroyed by the centralized authority or merely for the competition (a power grab is always competed against by someone who feels as strong, or stronger, to impose his own order as he sees fit), I don't know.  History is written by the winners of those pissing contests.  And before there were winners and losers, before writing, before the scribes were instructed what kind of narrative to write (or else), there was nothing to lie about.    

 

But another possibility is, it's all real.  It is told as it happened.  There were dragons and other genetically modified war machines,  originating somewhere on a different planet, occasionally fighting for this one, attempting hostile takeovers, one of them ultimately succeeding, and life on our planet behaving as their involuntary employee ever since.   

 

I wasn't thinking of it in that way - more to paraphrase LT - without order there is no chaos and visa versa.

 

The Egyptians had two types of chaos.  The first called 'heh' also meant infinity and was represented by tadpoles or frogs and water snakes.  It meant something like profusion - picture a pond full of tadpoles a kind of maze of life unrestrained.

 

The other type of chaos was Set (Sutekh) who was among other things a god of storms and desert - maybe a sand storm - a destructive force which even then had the plus side of being destructive of old orders.

[Nungali]

.

 

 

Edited October 31, 2019 by Nungali

[Taomeow]

.

Edited October 31, 2019 by Taomeow

[sean]

Thanks for reports, moved shenanigans to:

 

@Everything don't post in this topic anymore. 🙏

 

[Taomeow]

 @sean and the solidarity report bums -- thank you very much.  🙏

 

On 10/30/2019 at 10:05 AM, Apech said:

 

I wasn't thinking of it in that way - more to paraphrase LT - without order there is no chaos and visa versa.

 

The Egyptians had two types of chaos.  The first called 'heh' also meant infinity and was represented by tadpoles or frogs and water snakes.  It meant something like profusion - picture a pond full of tadpoles a kind of maze of life unrestrained.

 

The other type of chaos was Set (Sutekh) who was among other things a god of storms and desert - maybe a sand storm - a destructive force which even then had the plus side of being destructive of old orders.

 

Sumerians also had two kinds of chaos, but both were aspects of one entity, Tiamat.  She is the goddess creatress who peacefully brings the cosmos and all life in it into existence through a sacred marriage between salt and fresh water.  And she also embodies monsters of primordial chaos and engages Anzû in a marriage that gives birth to dragons with poisonous blood and sea serpents.

Edited October 31, 2019 by Taomeow