> Your choice of word to define the function of the
> cremation is fascinating to me, for the precise
> meaning of this word is as follows: "a
> religious or solemn ceremony consisting of
> a series of actions performed according to a
> prescribed order."
Yes! A religious OR solemn ceremony.
I might point out that both of these words have several definitions and each of these definitions are composed of words with many definitions.
> But let's not get hung up on the idea of religious
> belief because, as we all know from your
> endless diatribes, there is no word for belief,
> irrespective of your own acknowledgement
> here of the physical manifestation of
> belief in this solemn cultural practice and
Good! We're on the exact same page.
the king ascended to heaven to become a star
> Now you are indisputably entangled in an
> articulation of spiritual belief because
> this is metaphor, poetry, a fantastical way to
> express the ascension of the life force, energy,
> matter or soul of the deceased king who is
> physically burning and turning to smoke.
They meant EVERYTHING literally. Heaven was at '81' 3" and the king ascended to become the pyramid and the star. These were mnemonics. He literally became a star in heaven (3b3w). He was no longer a corporeal being as you or I but was the pyramid by day and the star by night.
We can't see this from our perspective which is why I used the word "mnemonic" which is the closest concept we have to a king literally becoming a pyramid. Obviously they didn't think the king was alive but he still "lived" on in peoples' memory.
We can't think like they did. They thought in three dimensions in a metaphysical language so they didn't talk like us either.
> These highly
> intelligent builders knew this from their
> scientific observations of everyday fires: smoke
> dissipates in the air, it is gaseous in nature and
> it does not shine at night as a star does.
I'm sorry but this is nonsense.
There is no science outside of metaphysics. They had no known metaphysics therefore it's IMPOSSIBLE they had any known science. It';s not real. This belief is not in agreement with any reality.
> The pyramid builders sat around fires often enough
> every night, keeping warm, to observe these
> scientific 'truths'.
No. Not "scientific" outside metaphysics.
> So, the AE culture was steeped in the very solemn
> beliefs which you constantly claim are
> not a part of their language. The king
> 'ascended' into 'heaven' and became
> a 'star'. Listen to yourself!
This is semantics. "Solemn" wasn't a good word for "ritual" to begin with and then you merely appended "belief" to it. They had no words that translate as "belief" or "thought". Not even Allen translates words that mean this. It follows they didn't "think" and had no beliefs. They didn't experience "thought" because they didn't compare sensory input to their models. In their own words; "the second moment after he saw N., the second moment after he perceived...".
> Of course it was part of their language: it was
> enacted physically, expressed metaphorically and
> as your final comment on the matter I asked of
> your opinion, even you state:
No metaphor either. They didn't even have words for taxonomies. They obviously didn't think like us and needed no such words because they had no definitions. They didn't organize their knowledge as we do. They were a different species for all practical purposes which is why the language breaks Zipf's Law. We refuse to see this which is why Egyptology won't address the linguistic issues.
The Pyramid Texts is quite clear on all this.
> I agree. See above.
Well... ...the literal meaning explains everything.