Do you worry about so-called afterlife?

Da'at and "daath" are the exact same word. They just rely on a different system of transliteration. In modern Hebrew, certain b'gad k'phat (or beged kephet) letters, which each originally had a hard and soft sound depending on where they occurred in a word, only have one sound. The tav is one of them. Some Jews originally from the middle east still maintain more of a "th" sound for a soft tav and ashkenazim traditionally apply an "s" sound, although in modern hebrew it's generally just dropped. (For more kooky Hebrew pronunciation fun, note that a Jew with a litvak accent would pronounce the phrase, "Reebono Shel Olam" (Master of the World) as "Ribboyne Shel Oylem.")

And I hate to really burst your bubble and ruin some of your faith in wikipedia, but they have an entirely separate page (which should have been merged) on "da'at."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Da'at

You will also notice, as you read that page, that the more information you gather about the sefirah of da'at, the less it sounds like "death." This is the source for the wikipedia article on "da'at":

http://www.inner.org/sefirot/sefdaat.htm

I will also refer you to Inner Space by R. Aryeh Kaplan page 198, Notes to Pages 51-53, footnote 19 where he explains:

"...Da-at-Knowledge generally refers to the concept of connection and intimate attachment as in "Adam knew (yada) his wife Eve"(Genesis 4:1) Adam and Eve are thus the paradigm of two people becoming as intimately bound to each other as possible, i.e. of completely knowing someone else...
...When da'at is included in the ten Sefirot, it alludes to the external bond between one unit of Sefirot and another... this is alluded to in the eleventh saying of Genesis, "God said, it is not good for man to be alone," which corresponds to da'at."

Also, from the kabbalahonline.org glossary:

"knowledge, the conclusive and action-oriented aspect of intellect; the third of the soul powers. It is the key to the emotional attributes. Daat is sometimes counted as the third of the ten sefirot -- when keter is not counted."

I don't see the relationship to death in any of this, unless you're going to stick to your guns by adjusting your position to say something like, "Well uhm, in death we become one with the universe, so naturally the idea of connection fits well with my view." But it would be awfully stubborn of you to do that. I think you'd be better off admitting you made a conclusion without adequate knowledge of the territory, lacking in knowledge of both the Hebrew language and of the sefirot of kabbalah.

For a more comprehensive review of the sefirot, and of kabbalah in general, I would recommend the book I mentioned earlier.

Oh, and to make something more clear, as I said that Hebrew uses an abjad instead of an alphabet, the letter ayin in the word da'at is the glottal stop represented by the apostrophe. However, this is the modern pronunciation. Originally, the ayin had a different, more gutteral and throaty sound which differentiated it from the aleph, which is also a glottal stop in modern hebrew.

 

Nimrod,

Adonai is actually a word substituted for the Tetragrammaton. You will notice that the Tanach (Jewish Scripture) itself makes substitutions for this name. If you look at Nach (Prophets and Writings) you will find the word Yah sometimes used as a substitute. Another substitute that Jews use is Hashem, and sometimes, in some circles, also Havayah, which is a permutation of the Tetragrammaton. It has nothing to do with greek or latin copiers. The Talmud maintains Adonai as a substitute for the Tetragrammaton, which, according to the Talmud, was only pronounced by the kohein gadol (high priest) on Yom Kippur.

But it is true that the words Adonai and YHWH are not related.

One question I would have about what you've put forth, if Baal and YHWH are both Enlil, then why does the Tanach condemn the worship of Baal?

Dauer

 

Well I never stamped my fist down saying that was true, i just made a comparison.

haha i hate to sound stubborn but the quote "Well uhm, in death we become one with the universe, so naturally the idea of connection fits well with my view." That does sort of go along with my beleif and many others. Consciousness continuing after death is common and has endured throughout history. Almost every civilization in history has had some belief system relating to life after death. This point of view holds that consciousness is more than simply a function of the brain. I appreciate the knowledge you supplied though, because I don't know Hebrew.

This is from the link you supplied Dauer

"Da'at is the third and last conscious power of intellect in Creation.
According to scholars of this mystical knowledge, Da'at is associated in the soul with the powers of memory and concentration, powers which rely upon one's "recognition" (hakarah) of, and "sensitivity" (hergesh) to, the potential meaningfulness of those ideas generated in consciousness through the powers of chochmah ("wisdom") and binah ("understanding"). This sensitivity itself derives from da'at's connection to the "superconscious" origin of the soul." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Da%27at

I'm sorry, but to me that sounds like what would happen after one dies.

My only real point was that after our physical bodies encounter death, the after life is when we receive "knowledge" of what we have yet to understand, and since daath was a similar word and also means "knowledge or wisdom" I thought I would just bring it up. Little did I know it would evolve into this.

But Nimrod was right when I left out the Egyptian book of the dead or The Egyptian Book of What is Daat.

 

I never said that we don't become one with the universe. I never denied any other form of afterlife either. I wouldn't have stated that particular belief if I didn't think there was a chance you believed it. But how does that justify maintaining that there is a connection between the English word "death" and the Hebrew word "daat?"

Can you explain how that reminds you of what you believe would happen after one dies?

dauer

 

This sensitivity itself derives from da'at's connection to the "superconscious" origin of the soul.

Upon death/daath you are re-connected.

I didn't mean to come off sounding like a dick if that's how you interpreted it.

I think there is plenty information to suggest that death and daath's correlation spawn from the same thing. This reconnection to the supreme consciousness which rely on our recognition and awareness that our "soul" is capable of, which is what da'at is described as, is my belief as to how death and daat are related. I mean they look and sound the same, and the definition of da'at is eerily similar to what my belief of death would be defined as. Reaching this realm of the unknowable that our mind, not physical mind, but spiritual mind, our inner self, not the ego, which can reach this dimension of "knowledge and wisdom" that daat encompasses.

 

Look at the two bolded statements.

You are completely and utterly contradicting yourself, in perhaps the most obvious way possible ...

You first say "the words aren't related" and then say "death could be derived from daath."

I really, really hate to crush your dreams man, but ... derivation is a relationship.

Near death experiences are closely related to the chemical N,N-dimethyltryptamine, or more commonly abbreviated, DMT. This chemical is sold on the streets as a powerful hallucinogen, rivalling Salvia divinorum as the only real contender for "most overwhelming, overpowering psychadelic substance known."

And here's the kicker: DMT is produced by the human brain! Moreover, it is produced specifically during a near-death experience by the cerebral cortex!

Why? The most common explaination is that the human brain produces it to calm down the individual sections of the brain during death -- making one's last minutes less erratic and more peaceful.

During a psychoactive experience, espeically a powerful one, people often hallucinate, and see things which aren't there. This is also a phenomenon experienced by those who are dying. But even beyond that, it is well-known that psychoactive substances make the mind more succeptible to convincing. Often times, merely imagining something is enough to make it actually appear, during such a powerful experience.

Now, have a near death experience, and imagine seeing a white light (especially in a hospital room, where pretty much EVERYTHING is white to begin with), and seeing the outline of Jesus Christ. Under the influence of DMT (and similar derivatives such as 5-Me-DMT and 5-MeO-DMT), this is something that could be considered to have a high probability.

DEFINITION OF DEATH according to Dictionary.com:

The end of life; the permanent cessation of vital bodily functions, as manifested in humans by the loss of heartbeat, the absence of spontaneous breathing, and brain death.

I do not care about your concept of the soul, or whether or not it exists, it is irrelevant except when talking about the afterlife.

Death is a physical phenomenon.

When you involve the afterlife, you are immediately attributing phenomena to a thing which (1) has no evidence of existance (if it did, the world would know, it would be published and the world would know it as true because it could be verified), and (2) is crazier than the idea of permanent death -- EVEN MORE INSANE than the idea of permament death!! -- this is something most people will not acknowledge, that the idea of "life after death" is more insane and complex than just "death", which just goes to show how ignorant people are of the principal of parsimony.

If there IS some sort of soul, which can be limited into a finite human existance, that soul must have some properties which are beyond human, which are capable of understanding, knowledge, and wisdom, that are beyond human -- in other words, in the realm of the "unknowable," such a thing as a "soul" could know these things -- not that it automatically would upon death, but there would be no "realm of the unknowable" because the soul would likely have a class-superclass relationship -- that is, a soul could be for any kind of being, not just human, therefore it must have properties that allow it to have the knowledge of all types of beings conceivable, otherwise some beings could never know anything at all and therefore would not really be beings as they could not be sentient. Thus, there can be no "realm of the unknowable" except when a soul is trapped in a human body. And yet, all of this -- which is speculation at best -- is human logic! Bringing this to a realm where human logic does not apply, is something you cannot do, because you are human. You are literally sitting here, trying to fathom the unfathomable, and worse -- trying to explain the unexplainable to another being when it cannot be explained. It makes sense when you try to explain it in human terms. But, the second you do, it is no longer the concept to which you are referring to -- description of the nature and relationships of such a realm is impossible!

Do you see where I am going with this? Even the idea of worrying about the afterlife, or arguing about what the afterlife is like, is completely pointless and grandiose in complexity. It is not something that you, nor I, are qualified to actually argue about, as we are human beings in a human life -- if there IS something beyond, it is impossible for us to know what it is.

And it all falls back to the principal of parsimony.

What is easier to believe?

Death?

or Death, followed by Life-which-cannot-be-comprehended(so-can-it-actually-even-be-called-Life)?

Definition of death. You don't have to die, to understand death. In fact, I am willing to bet money that those who ARE dying, understand death even less than those who aren't.

Yeah, I wish I had royalties too, but the bastard left my name out of the credits and I can't afford a lawyer! lol ... gotta keep SOME humour in this argument right? To keep eachother from getting pissed off.

Bingo. You hit the nail on the head.

You can't comprehend whether or not there is a soul to begin with, yet you say there is. You can't fathom what happens when you die, and yet you claim that we are given complete and infallible knowledge and wisdom when we die.

Do you see how this is completely contradictory yet?

Not if you can find a dictionary, or you know someone who can speak both languages.

Wait a second ... both of these exist! Let's consult them, or in this case, look for the results of consultation ...

And the results are in ... survey says!

*ding*

Death means "death"

And daath means "knowledge" or "wisdom"!

No relation!

[X] <- like Family Feud! Hehe

Point #1: You said, "only different because of a single vowel."

No. ONE of the *many* transliterations, is different because of a single vowel. However, "daath" or "da'at" are transliterations! The original word was in Hebrew, which cannot be correctly translated to English! Supposedly, the original word was spelled dalet ayin tav, or the d sound, followed by ayin, a consonent sound that cannot be pronounced in English (according to Wikipedia, the sound is similar to a "stop" or "silent nasal ng" sound, but is still not equivalent to either of these), followed by tav, pronounced as a t. The result gives you something more like "d-ng-t," rather than "da'at" or even "da'ath" or "daath."

Point #2: You said, "what if they are inherently the same thing?"

It has already been shown that the words "death" and "daath" are unrelated in etymology, and it has also already been shown, by people who know more about Hebrew than you or I, to have different meanings.

Your opinion, in this case, is definitively wrong, according to those who are qualified to speak of the Hebrew language with knowledge.

It's kind of like you saying your opinion is that the german word "gift" -- which means poisoin -- might mean the same thing as the English word "gift", when a German-English dictionary and people who speak both English and German both tell you that the two words are unrelated. It's not much of an opinion at that point, more of a belief in something that is proven wrong. It changes from "opinion" to more of a "daydream," and leads to "what if" questions like the one you just formulated above, when you said "what if they are inherently the same thing."

My point is, they aren't inherently the same thing. No "what if" is going to change that fact.

You keep saying that, bud. ::thumbs up::

Maybe one day, someone will care. Until then, the rest of the world, including those who believe in these Gods individually, will continue to tell you that the concepts differ.

Question for you:

If everyone has a different concept of these gods ...

Are they not different concepts?

You argue that they are the same.

How can that be right if they are different concepts?

How can you be right when those who have expertise in theology speak of these gods as separate entities?

You believe you are right, but you pound your beliefs as "fact" which it is not. You can cite your Sumerian texts all you like as "proof" but I can cite both the Bible and the Quran which identify their supreme "omni-max" deity with different properties than the other. I can also cite texts of Roman gods, and how they are all different.

Your texts mean no more than my texts, they certainly aren't proof.

Still -- this is unrelated to worrying about the afterlife, it doesn't belong on this thread.

Clearly, then, you cannot read.

Da'at is the third and last conscious power of intellect in Creation.. It has to do with CREATION, not DEATH.

No "afterlife" that I have ever heard envisioned, with the exception of the Buddhist concept of nibbana (nirvana), has ever included "gaining complete oneness and knowledge" on death. And nibbana is the death of the illusion of the ego, a realizaiton that there is no true "life" that can experience "death," and that no illusion of life can exist after death. Buddhist doctrine also contains the doctrine of "anatta" or "no soul," where it is clearly explained that the concept of a "soul" is not fundamental or even a part of Buddhist beliefs.

Finally, some sense!

Wait a second!!

This could be interpreted as "the light at the end of the tunnel!"

THIS KNOWLEDGE MUST MEAN DEATH!

THEY MUST BE RELATED! *audience gasps*

(chuckles)

No. There is plenty room for INTERPRETATION of information, to hypothesize that death and daath correllate.

However, even from your own sources, the actual information, when read literally (as information is intended to be read), implies that "death" is "death" and "daath" is "knowledge" and that "daath" is also "the third and last conscious power in creation" which has nothing to do with "death".

 

The Dauer, the Hebrew Old Testament wasn't translated to english untill the 1300's. It went through GREEK AND LATIN FIRST, ETHNOCENTRICITY DOMINATED IT words change, the JEWS and Christians were not always on the upper ends of these societies, the text was confused. All I mean by this is the attributes written about in the Old Testament are different gods with their characteristics, all called by the same name God. Yet they did not MEAN ONE GOD, THATS WHY THEY HAD DIFFERENT NAMES. Yahweh and Adonai, ARE NOT THE SAME, THEY WERE PART OF THE EARLIER BABYLONIAN PAGAN DIETIES, WITH SEMITIC NAMES, THESE WERE THE ANNUNAKI PHYSICAL ALIEN BEINGS IN WELL-DESCRIBED TEXTS, DATING BACK TO THE OLDEST CIVILIZATION IN WESTERN HISTORY. Enlil, Is the god of dominance, submission, warfare, obedience, and hierarchy, a VENGEFUL GOD. THIS IS THE GOD THAT IS MEANT WHEN THE OLD TESTAMENT, NEW TESTAMENT and QU'RAN speak of YAHWEH, ALLAH, and JEHOVA. The Dauer to answer your question about Baal, its because Baal is the CAANANITE linguistic version, which involved a different ethnocentricity, and attributes of Enlils sister Ishkur were incorporated, which involved Human sacrifice, other blood sacrifice, magic, demonology, incantations, basically all the occult sciences fell partially into her lap shared with Enki, and a few others. The Seal of Solomon, The swastika, all go back to them. Isn't it true Dauer that The Star of David is never mentioned in the Torah or Talmud? That during the Babylonian Captivity the Hebrews re-adopted this version of Yahweh as Enlil, for the fused entity known as Baal? Isn't this is the same thing King Solomon was accused of doing? Giving up on the pure essence of submission and fear of Yahweh, and not practice Devils games? Yet the neighbors were all doing it so HEEY WHAT THE FUCK I GUESS RIGHT?! NO Big deaL!
Enlil wanted none of that, total submission, no freedom. The Caananites mixed these qualities into the archetype that is Baal. Its a mixed copy. Ishkur also goes by the name Moloch, or Molochai. Enki by other means is known as Vulcan, Agni, Satan(mixed with virtually every bad characteristic of the annunaki and human into one mass of shit) Ahriman, Shiva, Ptah, and EA.
Adonai is only the Hebrew version of ENKI (not completely fused with some of enlils character), who is a TOTALLY SEPARATE ENTITIY, thats why these different names are used, and then totally dismissed entirely by the Muslims, cuz they only cause confusion being as them and Jehovahs witnesses are the closest to true Enlil slavery. Judaism and Christianity know these truths and have incorporated different aspects of the gods into their beleifs, and mysticisms. Im not saying any of it is wrong, is just a mishmash, its been the evolution of all religion from the oldest known civilization that had a sudden boom in culture, virtually out of nowhere not even to mention matching stories in the Old Testament and all of the Pagan and polytheistic religions and somehow matches with the linguistics and cultural migrations and evolutions since these periods. Thats all I meant by this, seeing that you can't beleive my alternate theory, of the annunaki as hikaru seems to feel the need to attack me over.

Hikaru how is the Annunaki illogical? In a day of Space Travel, and the Internet.

 

Well who is to say that death is not part of creation? As above as below.

Death is the 3rd stage.
Existence is the 2nd Stage.
Creation is the first stage.

Yea, I know what dmt is, and psycolibin is my choice when it comes to that. As well as the soul thing, I agree with a lot of what you say, but I don't think it should be set in stone that the "soul" or some other part of us doesn't transcend in some way shape or form. That was all I was trying to say.

Also, instead of looking at the hebrew word, look at the other etymology's. Daath is the English transltion from it, and eventually could have burned turned in death. Death meaning the Hebrew pronunciation, just shorter. Does that make sense? That English writers stripped it of meaning, and personified death as the grim reaper? Some physical entity meant to create a diversion. That is my point.

Image if the definition of death was the same as daath, and for the past hundred years of english when people thought of death, they didn't think of ceasing to exist, but instead reaching a realm of unfathomable knowledge.

We could argue for days about the afterlife, but in all reality, only dying could we fully understand it.

Oh, and back to the dmt thing. If you know anything about mushrooms, you'll know how far they go back in history with their spiritual usage. Think about when you die, how the dmt is released, and how mushrooms are the same experience. Could this be what we would become part of when we die? This seperate realm, only achievable by the use of dmt, in which are mind, our overbeing is in a state of euphoria, in tune with it's physical self.

That's just my 2 cents. I'll stick to my theory about how daat turned into death somewhere down the road, it's just similar for me to think likewise. And because I'm a stubborn asshole, but aren't we all ; )

I agree with Nimrod, how all religions spawn from this one group of deities, and through History they were mixed together and meaning's blended into different beings, even sometimes staying constant with their meaning. Then again, it's anyone's right to disagree but there's text to show it.

 

Hey, guess the fuck what.

WRONG PLACE TO PUT THIS.

I might have responded, but at this point, you're just detracting from the conversation on this thread.

And for YHWH's sake, put some damn spaces between your paragraphs!

Firstly, death is the opposite of creation. Just as there is no light in the darkness, just as there is no red in green, just as there is no stopping when you're going, there is no death in creation.

Death is a result of creation, yes. Stopping is a result of going. Green may be a result of using red (say, with other colours to make green). Moving the light may result in casting shadows (darkness).

"As above as below" as you put it.

Not that that phrase has any relation whatsoever to what you or I just said ...

Why, because it's natural?

DMT is more natural the psilocybin.

It's not set in stone. It's just not relevant to the discussion is all. Maybe there is a soul -- I sure as hell don't believe in one, but I'm not trying to disprove the soul's existance.

I think you need to go to etymonline.com and look up the etymology of death.

Here, let me do it for you actually:

"O.E. deað, from P.Gmc. *dauthaz, from verbal stem *dau- "die" + *-thuz suffix indicating "act, process, condition." Death's-head, a symbol of mortality, is from 1596. Death row first recorded 1940s. Slang be death on "be very good at" is from 1839. Deathbed in O.E. was "the grave;" meaning "bed on which someone dies" is from c.1400. Death wish first recorded 1896. The death-watch beetle (1668) inhabits houses, makes a ticking noise like a watch, and is superstitiously supposed to portend death." - Etymonline.com

Death, from dead, from dauthaz, from dau-thuz.

This one is from dictionary.com:

"[Middle English deeth, from Old English dath. See dheu-2 in Indo-European Roots.]"

Now, I've looked at the other etymologies -- as you wanted. Daath is a bad transliteration of the original word, and has nothing in common with the word death.

*imagines*

Can't do it. Because that's not how it happened. We wouldn't live in the world today, if what you say were true at all.

ThAAAnk you.

Psilocybin is not the same as dimethyltryptamine. They have VERY different effects.

I have tried psilocybin before. I have not tried DMT, but I have tried Salvia divinorum.

I have done extensive research on all three of these substances -- reading hundreds of trip reports, dozens of articles, news reports, and pages of statistics.

Salvia divinorum is generally regarded as "the most overwhelming, overpowering psychoactive substance known" because the experiences that it produces often have almost no connection whatsoever to reality, and because they are so convincing. As a user of Salvia divinorum, and of other substances, I can tell you that Salvia is BY FAR the strongest, most overwhelming thing I have ever tried. A mushroom trip doesn't even come anywhere close to Salvia -- it's like putting a Matchbox car next to a real Transformer robot -- there is no comparison.

That being said, the biggest contender for the title of "most overwhelming" psychoactive substance known (usually called "strongest") is 5-MeO-DMT, followed closely by 5-Me-DMT as well as N,N-DMT (the natural one).

These substances all produce similar effects, with lower dosages needed for 5-Me-DMT and 5-MeO-DMT.

Of all the trip reports I have read, a vast number of them have compared Salvia to DMT, or DMT to Salvia. Several of them actually referred to "Lady Sally and Lord Dmitri," saying that Salvia and DMT are polar opposites of strength, male and female, like that of god and demon (Salvia usually being the demon), or natural/foreign (DMT being foreign, Salvia being natural).

I have talked to a handful (about 5) people who have used both substances, as well as shrooms and LSD.

All of them, every single one, said that Salvia and DMT were on a level much higher than psilocybin and LSD. Some of them preferred Salvia and some preferred DMT, but all recognized that each of these substances had incredible power when tapped.

As far back as mushrooms go, Salvia goes back just as far with the Mazatec Indians. DMT is relatively new in usage, but it has been functioning in humans longer than humans have been eating fungi.

Either way -- no, psilocybin and DMT are unrelated both chemically and effectively, and DMT can be modified to produce different effects. Since this is the case, I highly doubt that DMT leads to another plane or realm of consciousness.

Furthermore, it has been shown that oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, and carbon dioxide are all psychoactive. In fact, all chemicals should in theory be psychoactive, but most (such as water) have an LD50 that is much lower than the HD50 (in other words, you'd die consuming these chemicals, before you noticed psychoactive effects).

All of these chemicals, psilocybin, DMT, and Salvinorin-A included, change your mindstate by binding to receptors. They do not "lead to another realm," and this can be pretty much proven by modern organic chemistry.

It's not a theory. It's a disproven idea. It cannot be a theory, because it stands no chance at being true.

There's also text to show against it.

Not that I disagree with what he says. But it's entirely off-topic for this thread.

He has text, I have text, my roommate has text ... text proves nothing. It shows nothing. It contradicts everything. And to even say "my text shows this" is ignorance of the nature of text in its quintessence.

 

Why don't we just simplify all this bullshit, and say that the word "death" in english evolved from germanic words meaning the same thing. We didn't need to borrow another languages word for death, especially not a language that had no contact at all with germanic/english language as it was forming. We borrow a lot from the french, but they were right across the channel, plus they ruled England for a long time.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=death (where it says P.Gmc means Pre-Germanic)

Can you not concieve that a word in one language may sound similar to another word in another language without having anything to do with it?

 

Middle English deeth, from Old English dath. See dheu-2 in Indo-European Roots.]"


Cool Dude! Thanks for telling me everything I already knew about DMT. Good luck getting your hands on DMT, you prolly would freak out and jump off a cliff if you smoked it.Yes, I do prefer psyclobin, because it's usage goes back for ages, and has been used by the likes of pharoahs, jesus, magi, and the secret mushroom cults of Mexico which spawned from the Mayans. As for psycolcibin and dmt not being related, how is it then psylocibin contains 4-dymethyltryptamine? Obviously you've never read any of Terrence Mckenna's work, the leader in DMT and psycolobin usage, they are VERY related. Read "The Archaic Revival" then come back and talk to me about how DMT/psylocibin don't take you to another realm. Fuck LSD, its a bastard demon child born in a laboratory. I hate to get off subject here, so ill get back to the original argument.

You showed me nothing disproving how daath and death are unrelated with the first etymology. Dying, Died, etc. are acts of death. That is a completely different meaning from death. Being dead is describing a person who is no longer in this dimension. Dying is describing a person who is slowly venturing into this realm. Death, is this realm. You can look up all the etymologies you want for die, dying, dead, death. They'll all be different.

Why do you have to make this so complicated? First you attack such a simple comparison which just by looking at the word death and daath you'd realize, hmm, maybe when we die we do go somewhere else. But I forgot your an atheist and can't fathom anything unless its scientifically proven, yes science, made by man, which still can't even figure out a cure for certain diseases. So I understand how you'd argue against this, seeing as how you don't beleive in anything except this reality. This daath/death comparison, It;s so simple your mind cant handle it. I understand. Second, you flood me with information about DMT, which I already knew, and you probably haven't even read any of Terrence Mckenna works, the leading author on psychoactive substances (smoked DMT/psycolibin, not pussy salvia). Third, if you did do research, you'd find ayahausca to be one of the most overpowering substances, because it is a form in which DMT can be taken orally, notoriously used by South American shamans. I don't need a lecture on these kind of things, all your doing is trying to make yourself look smarter in order to try and prove something.

Yes, my theory does still stand, because you haven't supplied enough evidence to to show that it doesn't, and the information you did supply, well just go to the top of this post and look for the color red. Your opinion is bias because you don't beleive in a soul or afterlife, so obviously your gonna do everything in your power to show me daath/death are unrelated, because your world will crumble if you accept it. The word death could have evolved any number of ways, you think Church officials wanted people to know death actually meant "knowledge or wisdom"? Of course not, how then would they be able to create a Heaven and Hell and a way to instill fear in the people? By personifying death as the grim reaper, and scaring people into thinking when they die the only thing that will save them is the fat ass preist molesting their son who supposedly prays to God for them after they give him their money. Maybe it's time people accept the fact that the English term "death" is derived from "knowledge or wisdom" which we receive when we die, not necessarily right away, and the etymologies and mistranslation, that are apparent in all holy texts, are just a way of misleading the people. That is my belief, as well as others who know about the Council of Nicea and the adandonment of certain texts, including the Gnostic gospels.

Daat/Daath, however you wanna spell it, is also referred to as "The Abyss" by Aleister Crowley, and the Hidden Circle in Kabbalah. Oh and another thing, The Egyptian Book of the Dead, it's also called The Egyptian Book of What is in the Daat.

Oh, and I didn't say "my text" or "his text" I said "there's text", meaning someone with a Ph.D wrote it. And if you noticed, Nimrod was answering Dauer's question. So it was relevant.

 

Yea systematic name for Psilocybin "4-Phosphoryloxy-N,N-
dimethyl-tryptamine". DMT is a very natural drug, it exists in your brain inside the pineal gland, makes you see visually as you dream, because your brain becomes flooded with it during deep sleep and a little less during REM. Also is noted to release during Near Death and Out of Body experiences. DMT is in all types of plants and grasses, as well as the venoms of some animals. 5-meo-dmt is rad, Ive dont it its dmt without the visuals. Salvia, is pretty cool too, but it did go hand in hand in Mexico with the Mushroom cults. Its a very limited experience, and nothing close to DMT visually. I have done 5-meo-dmt, I have done Salvia 10 x extract many times (which sucks it just burns your skin and makes you have a freaky experience.) Its not psychadelic at all like Dmt or shrooms, and since dmt is inside shrooms dmt is the major hallucinogen, and you can't say its more natural than psilocybin, you mean its more "PURE".

However, Salvia is shitty less enlightening than mushrooms and isn't anything like the transformer robot you said compared to 5-meo-dmt, or n-n dmt, its weaker than LSD by alot as a major experience, however LSD is very unnatural feeling.

As for all the annunaki stuff, I addressed it to The Dauer, because he asked me a question. Id like to see him respond. Sorry for going off-topic because your obviously anal about it because you had to say theres no way its true.

Trippin BTM pointed out the recent history of how English, was a germanic language that morphed over time with Latin via the French Connection. Yet what about how both of these Alphabets evolved from the Phoenician Alphabet which is the mother of modern language. And The Indo-European linguistics are written in relation to the Phoenician Alphabet. As is true with almost all languages on earth.

You even proved that Dath was an Old English word, which came from Dheu in the indo-european language using an alphabet that was originally phoenician. Plus Hebrew had no vowels, so you really could substitute and E with one of the A's in Daath. In the transliteration, just like the middle english was Deeth. As for Dheu it meant simply To close, finish, come full circle.

DAATH

The Hebrew word for knowledge. It is an existing/non-existing 11th
sephirah on the Tree of Life, the "Gateway to the Other World" (and to
the shadow-side of the tree), thence leading to the 22 qliphotic
tunnels and their demonic sentinels. By the same token, it is the same
doorway through which death, and non-existence come into life.

Daath is a concept beyond death that encompasses it, yet it was left out of the bible, in all its translations. It envolves spiritual and physical death.

 

The first thing I am going to say on this post, is scroll to the bottom, and read my challenge. It will be in green text. This will determine who is right and who is not.

Middle English deeth, from Old English dath. See dheu-2 in Indo-European Roots.

Just because Old English has a "dath" doesn't mean it's anything close to Hebrew "daath" or "da'at" or "dngt" or "dalet ayin tav."

Fortunately for me, I have more self control than most people.

And a brain. Maybe you're dumb enough to smoke next to a cliff, but I'm not.

I've also had the opportunity to get DMT before, and could probably get some of it within the next 2 days, if I really wanted to.

This is the most wrong statement I have heard in a long time. The chemical structure of psilocybin is 4-hydroxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine, or C sub 12, H sub 16, N sub 2, O.

Question: Does ozone "contain" oxygen? Recall that ozone is O sub 3 and oxygen is O sub 2.

Can you breathe ozone? No. You will die.
Does ozone react similar to oxygen in chemical reactions? No. It doesn't.
Really? Not even some reactions? Nope. Not really.

I recall watching an episode of ER on TV as a kid. There was a patient who had been taking DMSO2 in a medication, and using an inhaler. The added oxygen of the inhaler ended up converting DMSO2 into DMSO4.

What was the result of a mere two oxygen molecules being added?

DEATH.

Psilocybin is "related" to DMT only in that psilocybin's molecule is an expansion of DMT.

Psilocybin has COMPLETELY different effects than DMT. It affects different receptors in the brain, and reacts differently to the same stimuli.

Actually, I have read some of his work -- though bits and pieces.

And take a look at what you just said. I never said anything whatsoever about psilocybin [sic] not taking you to another realm. I simply said that the strength of psilocybin's effects compared to DMT's effects are diminuitive at least.

Actually, they are different FORMS of the WORD death.

Dying is present tense verb of death.
Died is past participle of death.
Death is the noun form of die.

They are different forms of the same word. They all have similar meanings -- as similar meaning as "a run" has to "to run" has to "running."

Wrong. Being dead is describing a body that no longer sustains vital life functions. Here, let me prove it:

And before you jump the gun and interpret "no longer in existence" as meaning "no longer in THIS existance," let me say, you CANNOT add words like "this" to the definition. No longer in existence means no longer in ALL existence. If it exists in some other existence -- guess what! It still exists in an existance!

But wait a second! By your logic, "existence" has nothing to do with "to exist" or "existing" or "existed" or even "will exist"!

Okay. I did.

Hmm. Looks like you're just blowing out hot air. Turns out, the etymologies for die, dead, and death ARE ALL THE SAME. And dying, is just "die" adding the English root "ing" and because of the vowel sound, changing "ie" to "y," as is customary in the English language.

Why can't you accept the fact that you're WRONG?

DEFINITION OF DEATH, man. DEFINITION. WHEN YOU DIE. THERE IS NOTHING ELSE. YOU DO NOT GO ANYWHERE. YOU are DEAD. Let's recap, shall we?

DEFINITION OF DEATH

The end of life; the permanent cessation of vital bodily functions, as manifested in humans by the loss of heartbeat, the absence of spontaneous breathing, and brain death.

Can you not read the part that says "PERMANENT CESSATION"?

Actually, I am not, and never was atheist. I was born and raised Christian, confirmed Christian, and experimented with various religions before deciding that all of them, including the concept of the afterlife, was just plain stupid.

Regardless, now you are merely providing an ad hominem argument. What you just said is an attack on me, and actually has NOTHING to do with the relationship (or lack thereof I should say) between death and "daath".

This is the whole problem with you. You assume too much. You say I don't believe in anything except this reality -- yet, you don't know me. You don't know everything I believe in. You make these simple little presumptions that I am some kind of fundamentalist atheist incarnate -- you couldn't be more wrong.

Beyond that, I'm not even an atheist.

And this STILL has nothing to do with daath!

No, it's so simple that your mind latches onto it!

See, this is the pattern of thought you're using:

Wow! Death and daath are one letter away! Maybe they mean the same thing! I am going to go tell people that they are related!

Here's mine:

Wow! Death and daath are one letter away! Maybe they mean the same thing! Let's find out ... hmm. The definitions are different. The etymology is different. And daath isn't even English, it's actually a transliteration of the Hebrew "dalet ayin tav" which can also be translated as "da'at" or "d-ng-t". Guess there wasn't a relation after all!

And yet, even Terrence McKenna is dwarfed by Professor Shulgin, another leading psychoactive researcher, who studies, in depth, ALL of these psychoactives (DMT, Salvia, and psilocybin included), in addition to many, many others.

It was Professor Shulgin who first told his student to put is head in a box and breathe in the vapours. The student reported effects similar to LSD. What was the vapour in the box? Carbon dioxide.

Not that any of this matters. This isn't a dicksize competition involving Shulgin and McKenna. The fact of the matter is, psilocybin and DMT produce drastically different effects, are are related only nominally -- that is, in name only! Chemical name, that is.

And of course, that's what you're doing too, right? Any psychoactive dummy knows that ayahuasca [sic: looks like you can't spell it right] contains DMT. What do you think street DMT is extracted from? The human brain?

My argument is that DMT is stronger than psilocybin. McKenna, Shulgin, or handful of hippies, it doesn't matter -- this has already been established.

You do the same, you do the same. Or, look at the part including dheu -- where you are wrong in presuming that the words all have different etymologies.

Etymology is actually what this entire argument revolves around, is it not?

I believe you have just lost your own challenge -- the etymologies are from Old English, not Hebrew. They are related to dheu, not daath/da'at.

So just because my opinion isn't the same one as yours, I am biased, and not you?

I'm sorry, but this just has to be said ... it's obligatory:

YOU ARE A DUMBASS IF YOU THINK YOU ARE ANY LESS BIASED THAN I AM.

You believe in the soul and afterlife, when there is NO evidence of either existing, *whatsoever*.

Actually, it was the pagans who personified death ... specifically, the Norse and Gaelic. Not the Hebrew or the Christians.

Why would we accept this as a fact?

There is no evidence even coming close to suggesting it is.

Here, let's settle this right now. You suggest we should accept this etymology as fact. So, provide your evidence that it is true. All facts are true and correct, right? So I want you to post, in a list, all of the arguments (and I don't mean points -- I mean singular logical arguments) that suggest that this is true. Then, we will respond back and forth, one paragraph each (no long ass paragraphs either, KISS it up -- keep it short and simple), until a conclusion can be drawn.

Keyword in what you just said? BELIEF.

It is FACT that your etymology and belief is wrong.

No matter what you believe in or how you believe it.

Here, let me offer you this second challenge:

I propose that you cannot provide a single etymological reference of the Modern English word "death" being related to the Hebrew romanization "daath" or "da'at" or Hebrew "dalet ayin tav".

Not a single etymological reference in this entire thread has shown that it goes back to Hebrew. However, at least THREE references have shown it being linked to "dheu" and not linked to "dalet ayin tav".

DMT is more natural than psilocybin because psilocybin is an extension of the DMT molecule.

Also, DMT is not found in mushrooms that contain psilocybin. If this were true, they would not be called "psilocybin mushrooms."

Beyond that -- Salvinorin-A IS psychadelic. Look up any paper whatsoever on Salvia divinorum. Yes, it is different than DMT and psilocybin -- that doesn't mean it's any less or more psychadelic.

And that's your opinion.

I have tried shrooms, and I have tried Salvia. I have learned more about the nature of reality, and had far more spiritual experiences, on Salvia, than I have on shrooms.

And there are always differing opinions. You don't think it's so powerful, but I could find more than a handful of opinions that think it is.

Regardless, this is getting off-topic now. Let's get back to the topic at hand.

Yeah, that's fine -- I didn't realize you were talking to The Dauer. My mistake. I thought you were just plugging it in there without warrant.

Point #1: Hebrew did have vowels. For a long time, scholars believed that it didn't, until one scholar was able to figure out that, in certain situations, some of the consonants made vowel sounds. There was a big post on teh Christianity boards about this, in relation to the name of the Christian God (Yahweh or Jehovah). The original Hebrew was the equivalent of YHWH. And the scholar realized that these were supposed to be vowels, by reading an older text that described the Tetragrammaton as four vowels. He then figured out that the first Y gives an "ee" sound, and could be transliterated as "I". The second H, as a vowel, would give an "ah" sound, and could be transliterated as "A". The W, or sometimes V as it is transliterated, becomes an "oo" as a vowel, transliterated, "U", and the trailing H is a masculine demoniator (that's how we know that "God" is male and not female!) which has a short e "eh" sound to it. This can be transliterated as "E". Put them together and you get IAUE. Pronounce that, and you get "ee-ah-oo-eh." Slur it, and you get "yahweh."

So Hebrew does in fact have vowels. No "substitution" would make sense.

Point #2: Dheu, to close, finish, come full circle.

Not related to knowledge or wisdom.

Thanks.

 

Ok, I did assume, and when I said atheist I actually mean agnostic. So I apologize, as it is necessary. I merely speculated to prove a point which I didn't fully get a cross. The point was the death in our culture has been enstilled in us as what we see on tv and movies. We see a man get shot, we see him die. He's dead. But nothing else. This is where our psyche makes us think oh he's dead, that's the end of him. No. That is the end of his physical existence. Death is merely a tool to scare people, it does work, but people shouldn't be afraid of death, which was my original post in this thread.

I'm sticking to my guns here. I shouldn't have to find references of Modern English, it's right there in the Olde English, where all of our words come from but changed ever so slightly with updates here and there. Why would people completely change a word when they can just add a vowel, such as dath, coming from daath/daat, and turning it into death? Why make things complicated for a group of people who probably couldnt even read in the first place? Your taking etmology too seriously, yes it does show how it derived from another language, but that doesn't mean there aren't factors we are blind to that changed the definition of the word, which in this case, it is obviously apparent.

"The delightful strangeness of etymology derives from all manner of weirdness. Yucatan, for example, is allegedly the answer to the Spanish explorer Francisco Fernandez de Cordoba’s question to a native as to what the name of the place was. In the Indian dialect, Yucatan means, “I don’t understand you.” "

Now, think of it like this.

Old English Guy - That man who was shot with an arrow, what will becometh of him?

Hebrew guy - Daath (in his mind he is thinking the definition of daath)

Old English guy - Dath? You mean his vital signs will cease to function? Hmmm I see.

Old English guy continues using the word dath until it evolves into death. When really the Hebrew man never explained what daath meant. To the English guy death represented a body merely ceasing to function because he was shot with an arrow. But to the Hebrew man, it meant he was passing into a realm of unfathomable knowledge and consciousness, which is the definition of daath, after his physical body ceased to exist in this realm.

That is what I meant by existence. We could go on and on and on about etymology. But before, you should read this to understand where I'm coming from.

http://www.halexandria.org/dward033.htm

And as for the DMT thing, I didn't really get technical and actually look it up, so my lingo on the chemical compounds was skewed. I'll stick to my shrooms, and you can stick to salvia. I just prefer something that has withstood the tests of time.

And here is some more information on Daath, maybe after reading it you'll see what I meant when I said time and translation can distort the true meaning of a word. Your right with the Hebrews not personifying death, cuz it meant something different to them, so even if death wasn't personified by the Church, it was borrowed from the pagans because it was part of their culture, they still used death to represent the worst possible outcome of human life and to enstill fear with the grandious views of Hell and eternal pits of flame did they not?

Dath in olde english is as close as I need to be to beleive that it comes from Hebrew. Seeing as how Olde English came BEFORE Modern English, it would seem logical the first etymology would be closer to the original word. I seriously don't understand how you could argue against this, its all here. You have to realize our view's on death are wrong, just because modern day science, which for some reason seems to be the King when deciding things can't prove it. So when you die, which wont be anytime soon because I wish for everyone to live a long happy life, you'll enter into a realm of unfathomable knowledge, and be like "Damn, reef was right." Because I sure as hell know there is more to our existence than living and dying and what the eye sees, and I don't need Science, which is merely a tool created by man, just like religion, to tell me that I'm wrong.

Here is the link for Daath, substitute Death where Daath is and see how the results would be similar. The only reason I said it would be bias is because from what I read you obvisosly don't beleive in an afterlife, or I could be speculating again.

http://www.halexandria.org/dward004.htm

 

Well, I definitely do acknowledge the whole seeing a man get shot and die on TV -- today's society is very desensitized to this.

Still -- when someone dies in real life, generally the only thing different than that on TV is funeral services and burial, and the reactions of people who knew that person, and all of the duties and emotions that come with such.

And, I also don't disagree with the part about not being afraid of death -- I don't know how we got into this argument, lol ...

This isn't about convenience or ever so slight changes.

This is about two different words, with different backgrounds.

You are making the assertion that they are related, merely because a transliteration of one is just like the other.

However, this is logically fallacious (and I am not talking about fellatio! ). I gave the previous example of the German word gift. Now, German is a language that is very closely related to English -- English is a Germanic language. However, the German word gift, despite being identical to the English word gift, has a completely different meaning.

Just because words are spelled similarly, or sound similarly, doesn't mean that they are similar.

And making the argument that it does mean they are similar (especially when there is evidence that they are not similar, let alone related), is illogical and incorrect.

Hey, etymology is a serious business when you are talking about the history of a word.

By your logic ("obviously apparent"), then if I give you Gift (in German), you should thank me and eat it. And you would die shortly after doing so.

Yes -- there can be factors we are blind to.

However, we are not blind to the etymology of this word. We know the etymology, pretty much conclusively. We know that the words aren't related, and that the word "death" is derived from "dheu". This can't be contested -- and if you think it can, I gave you the challenge earlier, to provide evidence.

Yet another beautiful example of etymology describing the history of "Yucatan."

I considered this, and then realized something.

Back then, Old English Guy would have been pretty much completely unable to converse with Hebrew guy -- and they didn't even meet eachother often at all, especially considering death was personified millennia ago by the Norse and Gaelics.

As you said before, these people couldn't even read for the most part. Especially millennia ago.

I understand that it's a possibility. However, most words -- especially those words which represent concepts as important as death -- evolve a specific way over time. A single man, back then, could not possibly, in a hundred or even a thousand years, have changed the entire population's worth for death, simply because he heard a Hebrew speak that word -- which would probably be nested in a Hebrew sentence that would be unintelligible to Old English Guy, and Hebrew Guy wouldn't have been able to understand what Old English Guy was saying, to even reply "daath" as a single word.

The possibility of it having gone down like that, or even close to that, is virtually zilch. Especially when we are able to trace that word back to "dheu" which sounds nothing like "daath."

Regardless, even if somehow the etymologies of daath and death were somehow related, you originally said: "the hebrew word for knowledge is "daath". add an -e subtract an -a, what are you left with? death" and then "well i dont really think its a coincidence, its not like daath is the hebrew word for salad bowl, instead it is variously translated as "mind", "opinion", "reason", "knowledge" or "wisdom"."

Your original argument insinuated that they have different meanings, let alone etymologies. And conclusively, "knowledge" is not "the permanent cessation of vital body functions."

Oh, but you insinuate that Salvia hasn't withstood the tests of time.

Salvia has been in use for thousands of years by the Mazatec Indians in Mexico.

If anything, I would not be surprised of the original guy who discovered shrooms ate a shroom, and then started eating random plants, and ate Salvia.

True.

But that doesn't help your case as far as the etymology of the word is concerned.

By that logic, you should not be comparing "dath" to "daath/da'at".

You should be comparing "dheu" to "da'at". And they are different in spelling, meaning, and sound. The only thing they have in common is that they both begin with a d consonant sound -- and that isn't enough to support your conclusion.

It is not science that is the king of deciding things, it is logic.

Science and logic go hand in hand because science is based off of logic -- science is the physical application of human logic to the physical world.

And nothing is more logical than logic. The decision making process is one based off of human intelligence, interpretation, and evidence (even if it is subjective). Logic quite literally is the King of all these areas.

Logic provides a better argument than anything else. That's why it is the "King."

Science isn't a tool ... but people like to coin it as one.

Science is a study. It is a way of gathering knowledge about the physical world, through observation and experimentation. It is, as I said earlier, rooted in logic.

For something to disagree with science, it must also disagree with logic. If it disagrees with logic, it cannot be considered a valid conclusion. Maybe a creative, imaginative, or neat conclusion. But not valid.

Of course, how does that old saying go ... you can't win an argument with an idiot, because he's always right -- no matter what.

(I don't mean to call you an idiot -- that's just how the saying goes.)

The kind of dogmatic "I know I'm right even if it's illogical" is the reason why religion has such a foothold on the world that it does today. It's the reason why so many people suffer more than they have to. I try to further the world, and ensure that others do not suffer, by calling that which is illogical into the light, and exposing it for its flaws. This way, people are not led astray from the correct conclusions that can lead to our prosperity and happiness.

 

Hikaru DMT is present in Psilocybin is all that I said. IT is not pure dmt, but it is the hallucinogneic quality of Psilocybin, yet there are other active ingredients make it simply like I said less pure dmt, ensuing a different enzyme breakdown, causing different effects. They're not completely different the DMT IS STILL THE MAIN FACTOR MAKING YOU TRIP IN MUSHROOMS
Psilocybin (4-Phosphoryloxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine)
Psilocin (4-hydroxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine)
Baeocystin (4-Phosphoryloxy-N-methyltryptamine)
<LI>Norbaeocystin (4-Phosphoryloxytryptamine)
these are all active ingredients. Your right when you say its different, but not entirely different and they are related.

As for the old english Dath, and Middle english deeth. This is obviously when the latin ideas of Christianity and Judaism were first being introduced into the Indo-European language base. That is proof enough right there man. Deeth, and Dath were the changes made to Dheu. As the English language was forming, with the influx of change from the monotheisms.

Here's another one how does Ma'at the Egyptian Transliteration for "truth" drop an A and add an H at the end, and you have math! The only truth in the universe! Thats rational and proven and logical in most cases! This can be done for alot of shit man. What about this example, The Book of The dead, not only is sometimes referred to the Book of What is in the daat, its original title in Arabic is, The book of coming and going forth by day. Now what does this title have to do with death? Absolutely nothing.

OK well we can prove that Daath can be substituted with Gnosis in greek, mean EXACTLY the same thing. Maybe I can show you what were trying to get at from this angle. These words being synonyms, the ultimate goal of a Gnostic is EGO-DEATH, and ressurection, or rebirth, thus causing enlightenment. Yet the ultimate goal of the Extreme radical gnostic is physical death, because only in liberation of the monad, spirit, soul, astral body, light body whatever you wanna call it then that body know the truest knowledge. It is intuitive and beyond words. So substituting daat or daath would then read. The ultimate goal of a daath practitioner would be ego-death, and rebirth untill physical death. Which is a perfect example of the Cathar religion which were devout gnostics. Viewing death as the ultimate, and the only way to learn true knowledge. The endura was ritual suicide done in company of the Perfecti priests.

If anything though we can definately prove how George Lucas copied the idea of Daath, and called it Darth. As his name for a newly initiated Sith, who has reached a level of training and knowledge of the Dark Side.

Whatever you say Hikaru, Daath is viewed as a portal, death is also viewed as a portal. If you want to prove something find for me the Hebrew translation to Latin or Greek of Death, not knowledge.

 

Nimrod,

your answer evaded the issue I presented. Maybe I didn't present it well. Jews have been studying the Tanach in Hebrew since even before the septuagint. So when you bring up an issue of translation against me to say I'm wrong, it makes me think you really don't have all the facts.

As to the rest of what you've said, you're just as welcome to interpret the sources any way you'd like as the next person, but until you can give evidence that any of these entities do exist, it's all just the same mythos-babble, something I try not to take too seriously. I will give you credit for being up to date on some particular theories of biblical criticism, but then I will take that credit away because you comandeer it as evidence of "physical alien beings" being understood as gods.

 

Im glad you allow to have my own opinion. I dunno man I just thought that Yahweh forbade all the occult sciences. That Judaism picked up along the way. The six pointed star being one of them. This is why it is not pure Enlil worship, wheres Islam and the Jehovas witness is closer. Thats why I propose that Yahweh. Baal is just a suped up version, of enlil plus another god, yet this relates Baal and Yahweh. Only due to the ways of worship. Yet in the days after the Tanach was written, Judaism did morph somewhat more towards baal.

 

What about another transliteration from Egyptian to English, the Habiru. Where a tribe of militant warriors, migrant laborers. These were the proto-hebrews. Yet how is this transliteration all that different from Hebrew? Shouldn't a transliteration in Egyptian sound nothing like that? Habiru=the oldest hebrews
Death=Daath

 

See, you aren't putting the relationship between DMT and psilocybin into correct words.

DMT is not "present" in psilocybin -- it does not have anything to do with the psychoactiveness or properties of psilocybin. Psilocybin is a combination of the DMT molecule and several hydroxy groups. While the design of the molecule is not too different than the DMT molecule, it is still a completely different molecule with completely different effects and reactions.

DMT is not the "hallucinogenic quality" of psilocybin. It affects different receptors in the brain than DMT does, it has entirely different effects than DMT does. Like I said before, just because you add a few hydroxy groups, and change a few of the chemical bonds around, does not mean that the molecules are even remotely similar other than in chemical name only.

It is not less "pure" than DMT. "Pure" is a word used to describe the contamination of a sample of a chemical -- not the expansion of the chemical molecule. What you have is not "unpure" DMT. It is "pure" psilocybin. They are *completely* different molecules, and any scientist who studies them would tell you that.

NO ITS NOT. IF THIS WERE TRUE, THEN OZONE WOULD NOT KILL YOU, DMSO4 WOULD NOT KILL YOU WHILE DMSO2 HELPS YOU.

Take a look for example. Do you think that heroin and morphine have anything in common? They have different effects, they affect different parts of the brain. And yet, heroin's chemical formula is 4-hydroxy-morphine.

When you change a chemical *AT ALL,* it becomes a different chemical which little to nothing similar to the original! OZONE is NOT similar to OXYGEN. CARBON MONOXIDE is NOT similar to CARBON DIOXIDE. Even LSD (Lysergic Acid Dimethylalanine) is not similar to LSA (Lysercig Acid Amide) which it was synthesized using!

Yes. THESE are the active ingredients, NOT DMT.

They have entirely different reactions and entirely different effects.

The only way any of them are related, is through the chemical name! Even the chemical bonding is different between parts of the DMT molecule -- the "DMT" in these molecules, isn't even DMT anymore, it's modified in order to allow the added phosphoryloxy and hydroxy groups.

Just because you say "this is obviously when ..." does not make it proof!

What the hell are you smoking, man? If you go back and check every step in the evolution of a language, I guarantee that you can find equivalents of the word "daath" in at least fifty languages! And you will find different meanings for the majority of them! It has NOTHING to do with daath!

Here's one for you too! How does "Gift" in the German transliteration for "poison" CHANGE ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOTHING, and you have "gift"!

OH MY FUCKING GOD MAYBE THE SKY IS FUCKING FALLING!

Just because you change a few letters DOES NOT MEAN THE WORDS ARE SIMILAR OR EVEN RELATED.

I do not know how many times I am going to have to say this!

You can change letters in any fucking language, to make words in another language, and you STILL will not have anything REMOTELY close to proof that they are similar.

Here, let me take a shot at what you are doing!

Lĕshôn Ha-Kôdesh or "language of Holiness," also known as Hebrew.

Leshon ... wait a second, drop the h and add an i, and you have LESION. HOLY SHIT, ACCORDING TO MY ASTUTE FINDINGS, HEBREW IS THE LANGUAGE OF LESIONS HOLY FUCKING SHIT THEY MUST HAVE ALL BEEN DOING DMX AND GETTING OLNEY'S LESIONS IN THEIR BRAINS! AND WORSE YET, THEY WERE "LESIONS" OF HOLINESS! WOW!

Let's do some more awesome translations!

The Hebrew word for "vowels" is "tnu‘ot".

Tnu'ot ... tnuot ... hey! That n looks kind of like an r! Now simply transpose the u and o ...

TROUT! HOLY SHIT! A FISH! FISH ARE VOWELS IN HEBREW OMGOMGOMGOMGOM I AM THE SMARTEST BEING ALIVE.

Do you understand why I'm being an asshole here? It's called satire, I'm being an asshole not to piss you off, only to demostrate how ridiculously absurd your claims are that dheu and da'at are related simply because you can use one transliteration and change a couple letters and make it "death". Especially after a variety of etymological sources show that there is no relation!

Once again, you would be hard pressed to find ANY evidence other than your lame little letter transposition tricks, to suggest that they are similar.

OH WOW, LET'S DO THIS LITTLE TRICK AGAIN!

SUBSTITUTE AN R INSTEAD OF AN A!

WHERE DID THE R COME FROM? I DON'T KNOW! LET'S JUST PLUG IT IN THERE LIKE IDIOTS!

"Contrary to popular belief, the word "Darth" is neither a Dutch nor German word meaning "dark" (donker and dunkel, respectively), although "Vader" is Dutch for "father". Also, Darth is often thought to be a combination of letters from the title 'Dark Lord of the Sith', but there is no basis in Star Wars canon for this. "Darth" may also be a portmanteau of "dark" and "death."" - Wikipedia

"Etymology - Unknown; sometimes considered to be a contraction of the title Dark Lord of the Sith, or a blend of dark and death." - Wiktionary

Do we now see ANYTHING AT ALL relating to "Daath"? NO! Maybe to "DEATH", yes! Maybe to "DARK", yes! ANYTHING with "Daath," or knowledge? NO!