RE: Egyptian funerary texts
December 16, 2011 at 2:12 am
(This post was last modified: December 16, 2011 at 2:15 am by dtango.)
(December 15, 2011 at 8:33 pm)houseofcantor Wrote: I have been "with tao" before even reading the tao te ching, now I keep ending up where I need to be. You keep doing what you're doing, I keep doing what I'm doing; and shit is gonna get fixed..
...and that reminds me. Is Ba meant to be untranslatable, like tao?
No! There is a fundamental difference between Tao and the Egyptian theology of the funerary texts.
Taoism is pure philosophy, a concept of a man or a group of men while what philosophy (theology) is found in the Egyptian texts is the result of misinterpretation, misrepresentation and falsification of the texts.
The term “Ba,” is not untraslatable but they avoid to translate it because if they render it always as “soul” then there are souls who own houses, who build houses and who are eventually killed in the slaughterhouses -which my good friend Rhythm mentions. If on the other hand they translate the word according to the requirements of the context, they would have to answer a lot of questions which they are not prepared or willing to answer.
“Ba” was originally the title of a person and it meant something like “supervisor.”
This supervisor was responsible for a group of men who had not yet been judged and when the time was coming for the judgment of each one of his men, he was accompanying them and was acting as a sort of witness of defense for them.
When the man undergoing judgment failed to pass the trial successfully he was exterminated, the Ba’s duty was over and so the Ba was going away.
When the man died, his Ba was going away!
When the man died, his soul was going away!!




