> Thank you Cladking and Orygyptian,
> But I think the evidence IS there.
> Am I wrong in saying that The Ka,
> and Ba, arise from the body of the
> deceased Pharaoh?
> I for one Am impressed by
> the evidence thus presented,
> although I think later generations
> used the Tombs for alternative reasons.
The problem is very much that no one knows. The orthodox interpretation could be correct but if it is there are massive inconsistencies and where a proper scientific theory presents predictions, orthodoxy presents mysteries. I have to believe orthodox interpretations are incorrect. How can there be so much evidence for their interpretations as they aver yet they can't come up with any evidence that any great pyramid is a tomb? Why did the builders say they were not tombs?
Earlier in the thread I gave my interpretation of the nature of the ka, ba, and shadow based on what they said and the way I understand their "beliefs". In order for the builders to have always made perfect sense these definitions probably apply. I believe they did make sense so I believe that when they said the pyramid was the ka;
1652a. To say: O Atum-Khepri, when thou didst mount as a hill,
1652b. and didst shine as bnw of the ben (or, benben) in the temple of the "phoenix" in Heliopolis,
1652c. and didst spew out as Shu, and did spit out as Tefnut,
1653a. (then) thou didst put thine arms about them, as the arm(s) of a ka, that thy ka might be in them.
1653b. Atum, so put thine arms about N.,
1653c. about this temple, about this pyramid, as the arm (s) of a ka,
1653d. that the ka of N. may be in it, enduring for ever and ever.
The ka and ba are very elusive concepts in the PT. The "ba-sceptre" appears to have been the weir which provided the water to lift the stone. From their perspective it was the water that allowed the pyramid to be built. It was the concept that water was the ability to make manifest in reality and this is the understanding of the builders. Later people misunderstood the concept in much the same way Egyptologists do and Egyptologists can't see that the meaning of the term changed. They see the ancients from the same perspective and using he same kind of language that later people used. They have a book of the dead perspective of the Pyramid Texts. Even terms are translated to fit the book of the dead as evidenced by the fact that even gods mentioned a single time in the PT are assumed to be the same god from later eras.
Orthodox understanding is not making accurate predictions and is generating mysteries. It is probably wrong and that the pyramids were tombs is central to orthodox understanding of the people who built the great pyramids. That they assume that nothing ever changed is the weak link in how they developed their theories and ended up with ramps and superstitious people.
Whatever the reality was it will require more information. In the meantime the only thing that has changed is that ramps are debunked and the mountain of evidence has been deflated. There is no direct evidence the great pyramids were tombs and the word ramp isn't even attested. It is entirely possible that the ancient people were not superstitious at all.