I always reply to every question and point... ...at least once.
> Add to the list of questions : Please explain
> these "king ascension ceremonies".?
This very much gets into speculation. All I know is the ritual itself and can only make inferences about the nature of the ceremony. A few are more apparent than others;
1431a. To say: He is gone who went to his ka; Mḫnti-’irti is gone to his ka;
1431b. N. is gone to his ka, to heaven.
The dead king goes to his ka; the pyramid after the lord of the device that allows construction goes to his ka.
In English the the king ascends on the pyramid to be cremated.
1431c. A ladder is made for him, upon which he mounts, in its name of "That which mounts to heaven."
1432a. His boat is brought to him by the d‘m-sceptres of the imperishable stars.
The pulleys bring to him the boat that he might ascend to the first step. The "imperishable stars" (CO2) drives the process.
1432b. The bull (or, ox) of heaven lowers its horn, so that he may pass thereon to the lakes of Dȝ.t.
The "lake of the geyser" contains sekhmet and the Bull of Heaven must "lower" its horn so that the dead king can be loaded aboard.
1433a. O N., thou dost not fall to the ground.
He doesn't fall.
1433b. N. lays hold of the two sycamores, which are in the middle of yonder side of the sky,
1433c. which ferry him over, and they set him on the eastern side of the sky.
The last two lines are like a determinative. The two sycamores are the djeds which effectively deposit him in the middle of the east side at 81' 3".
Obviously this ceremony involved loading the king on the ascender so that he could be transported to the pyre on the first step. Most everything else as far as details has to be guessed at. It appears to have been on the 5th day of the w3g-festival after the unpacking of the fire-pan from anubis' chest ceremony.
> Given you are the only person EVER on the planet
> to believe this, and the rest of us from circa
> 2000BC on speak a entirely different language and
> think "differently" then the challenge is set
> before you to explain it all in "our" speak.
> Clearly and articulately (even without evidence).
Really!!! In addition to having to rediscover how the pyramids were built and the nature of humanity as well as ancient science and Ancient Language I'm now expected to be the guy who deconfuses the language. The language is confused and I doubt God Himself could unscramble it. I have several times made proposals that might help but they seem to fall only on deaf ears.
I am explaining this to the best of my ability. Of course, I'm well aware that I don't explain things too well. Maybe the next guy will be more articulate but nobody can possibly say anything that won't be deconstructed differently by every reader. It would still require people to try to understand even if Shakespeare picked up the torch.
> Another question to add. Define and describe this
> "Metaphysics" (metaphysical language) where does
> one learn or study it.?
There might be many different metaphysical languages possible but I know only one. This language was used my all animals and ancient humans.
Theory was expressed "gods". Every word had a single meaning and every thing had three words. The choice of words defined subjects and objects. Perspective was defined and meaning existed in context. It's not that hard;