Noctifera wrote:

kenpodragon wrote:I think Caiyros was trying to state that there is a misconception about the "books of the dead" being related to a necronomicon or grimoire, rather than a book of spiritual wisdom.

I am quite aware he was referring to this (although the multiple books of the dead were not addressed, from what I can see..)
However, the manner in which he does so I find to be misleading - which is why I sought to clarify the facts for others who may be reading;
the rest of what he has stated in regards to the book is more along the lines of one interpretation on the contents therein. The funerary rites can be understood as a source of death/afterlife magick. One versed in the death arts would be more attuned to that significance.

So contrary to what a scholarly notion may depict, I do not feel there is a wrong or right way to look at it.. beyond the very nature of the subject matter.

You have a right to your wrong opinion, but you and "the necro squad" are not egyptologists nor have ever made any public claims to understanding Eastern Thought and Eastern Thought came from the Yoruba to the Meroe to the Ancient Egyptians and then directly to Sumer & China......What Moulee & I have plotted out is absolutely correct.
Caiyros

MWatson-CHolmes wrote:You have a right to your wrong opinion, but you and "the necro squad" are not egyptologists nor have ever made any public claims to understanding Eastern Thought and Eastern Thought came from the Yoruba to the Meroe to the Ancient Egyptians and then directly to Sumer & China......What Moulee & I have plotted out is absolutely correct.
Caiyros

Well, I thought we could have a civil exchange but I suppose not. This is a childish manner for you to head off a response.
Especially given the fact that I only said your statement was misleading, not incorrect. Therefore your response here is totally irrelevant to what I actually meant to convey.

Aside from that silliness...
First of all, there is no such thing as a wrong opinion.
Secondly, what I have posted is important and clearly both factual and entirely reasonable.

Finally, one does not have to be an 'egyptologist' to know how to read.

But for that matter, nobody has any reason to believe you an 'egyptologist' just because you claim to be, and your oft insinuation that nobody else knows what they are talking about (mostly when they conflict with you on some level) is a rude assumption.
There is no room for elitism in the quest for real knowledge..

I only want to encourage others to research for themselves and read these readily available texts, rather than limit themselves to the commentary of self-proclaimed experts.
All any individual can have about the true significance of something that was certainly before their time and out of a modern context is a theory, interpretation or opinion.

I don't know, Necro Squad sounds kind of catchy. What do you think; comic book, cartoon, goth version of the Ghostbusters? Great idea, Caiyros! Keep them coming.

I'm thinking video game

I'm thinking Judge Death's little posse from the Dredd comics.

MWatson-CHolmes wrote:The mediaeval Concept of Death, Destruction, Curses, and 'playing with death bodies (either in fancy or in reality, is basically an ugly waste of time and a part of arrogant mediaevalism that still prospers in some quarters.

And that's where interpretation, and the relativity of perception largely factors in..
because as I gather, and many others can from the knowledge available and evident in the ancient funerary preparation of corpses, the dead body form - physical corpse was greatly respected and understood as a key factor in one's spiritual transcendence in the afterlife.
They treated the bodies, and organs with great care and reverence as a crucial element of merging body and spirit, therefore being able to reconcile the intangible.. 'playing with death bodies', as you put it, was not such an 'ugly waste of time' to them.. these were sacred vessels of the spirit that would continue to act as a portal of that spirit through the shrouding process, offerings, treasures and tools buried with them.

In fact many ancient cultures treated the flesh with great significance and through rituals of the blood and body - as grisly as they may seem by our modern cultural conditioning - established a crucial, genuine connection with their mortality.. so opening themselves to spiritual evolution.
Something that is not so common now, something that many shirk from.. the conscious inevitability of death and honor of the flesh. In this way we can say that those avoidant of and condemning these aspects are rather, the ones dominated by 'mediaeval' concepts restricting their growth.

Therefore I glossed over the fact that I further disagreed with you..
but it's such an interesting topic I'm always glad to expound.

I am enjoying your point of view, Noc. It's refreshing to see someone educated about the fact that death isn't the big bad, and that bodies are sacred and deserve our care, and not our fear.

Blessings.

MWatson-CHolmes wrote:The mediaeval Concept of Death, Destruction, Curses, and 'playing with death bodies (either in fancy or in reality, is basically an ugly waste of time and a part of arrogant mediaevalism that still prospers in some quarters.

Mind elaborating on this a bit?

Nyctophilia Raven wrote:I am enjoying your point of view, Noc. It's refreshing to see someone educated about the fact that death isn't the big bad, and that bodies are sacred and deserve our care, and not our fear.

Blessings.

I agree. I really enjoy reading Noc´s posts about the topic and I can almost feel some ideas growing for future artworks as well.

OK,

I have been arguing with myself about this thread wanting to put some of my thoughts together, but condensing years of study and work has not resulted in a viable response for my overly critical mind....anyway, after hours of re-writing, finally got something written....pressed the post reply button, and voila...NOTHING....not one word was saved or posted. It never happened before today. So i guess i am not meant to do anything here at the moment.

Leaving with a thank you for the thread, interesting..
M.