To: K-list
Recieved: 2000/12/22 19:06
Subject: Re: [K-list] Foodstuff and Genetic Engineering
From: Wim Borsboom
On 2000/12/22 19:06, Wim Borsboom posted thus to the K-list:
:-) :-) :-)
...paste...
> This is a sexually > boring rhetoric masturbation
> message so please change your channel
> if you can't deal
Dear Angelique,
Whatever follows is with due respect, please do not take me wrong...
While communicating, we too often assume that other person understands
what we mean, or... that the other person means what we understand that
person to mean. That is often not the case... The other person usually
means to convey something that is not understood yet. That is the idea
behind exchanging ideas and expanding on them.
Instead of that we are getting into arguments.
Well this may be patronizing, again, and if it is, I may not be not
easily curable... not in the short term anyway, so let me work on it.
This is my first attempt at recognizing it.
You wrote:
> .... They come from your interpretation.
> If you could interpret Sumerian Cuneiform
> 30 years ago, then why did you not publish
> your findings?
> The only one known to have cracked the
> code is Stitchin, and I do not get much
> resonance with his interpretations, either.
> Now you are claiming to have predated his work..
> but you offer nothing to back it up,
It was in 1963 that I came upon a Dutch book by a Norwegian Prof. W.B.
Kristensen "Symbol and Reality" and in 1966 another book by him
"Religions in the Old World." These books were collections by him of
lectures to the Dutch Academy of Sciences. An article by him from 1915
(!) about the Sumer Gilgamesh Epos got me seriously interested in
Sumerian history and writing. It was translated from Sumer cuneiform in
the 1880s (The archaeology department of the university in Leiden,
Holland where he taught, is quite famous... a lot of original Sumerian
translation work was done there as well). I visited that university's
library often, getting there on my "mobylette" through the low land
polders, wet and windy days...
It was a little later that I started to read some of Mircea Eliade's
works. It was then that I tried to really get into Sumerian texts. I
went through some of my notes and I figure that by 1971 I must have
learned some 500 Sumerian words.
Then, just like so many 'shroom heads' of my generation (I only used
psilocybin (sp??) once, never used any other mind expanding drugs), I
steeped myself deeply into "The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross" (by John
Allegro, 1971) and... initially I felt right at home, Sumerian language
and all. But then my visions started to come in stronger and I developed
different ideas about the meaning of some Sumerian stories. Later of
course I became very much interested in John Allegro's 'Dead Sea
Scrolls' work.
> ...and say you cannot do it anymore..
> so I assume it is an idle boast.. more rhetoric?
During my second to last NDE almost 5 years ago in Holland, I must have
lost quite a few braincell connections. Memory of Sanskrit and Sumer
script is still very hard for me to retrieve, lower case Greek
characters I never lost, but Greek capitals I had to learn again. Funny
how that goes. Interest in book learning stopped as well for quite some
time. I am trying to learn some Cantonese and it is coming easier now...
> The only one known to have cracked the
> code is Stitchin, and I do not get much
> resonance with his interpretations, either.
As far as I know Zechariah Sitchin in his books used existing
translations. Let me find out... ... ... OK, his translation sources run
from 1902 to 1969 for his first book. Some people put him quite high on
the ladder of producing hard to accept theories, but I never had any
great difficulty with him. I find many of his views very intriguing...
although not all his conclusions tie in with some visions I had... some
do though, very much... corroboration!
Anyway, Angelique, although it does not matter... (and maybe it does...
by the looks of it), I have to stand up for myself just as much as you
do. There is no idle boast in what I write. I may be boasting but idle
it is not. Vain yes, but who is not a stranger in Vanity World?
> Someone privately referred to your
> posts as "boring rhetoric masturbation"..
> but hey, don't let that stop you. Nothing wrong
> with masturbation although it is not usually
> a spectator sport.
:-) :-) Well it seems that our list is trying to break ground on the
spectator part, at least as far as graphical descriptions are concerned.
:-) :-)
Next time I will put a warning above my posts:
> This is a sexually > boring rhetoric masturbation
> message so please change your channel
> if you can't deal
Why don't I do it now...? :-) :-)
...copy...
Love,
Insufferable Wim
1/9699/0/_/680797/_/977536442/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
http://www.kundalini-gateway.org
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.