Do you worry about so-called afterlife?

Ok, well my wholoe point was "Death" in the English wasn't just magically made up by some guy translating Hebrew text into Olde English. He obviously based "death" off of the Hebrew word "daath", thus getting the olde english word "dath". It makes sense to me, even though you'll rebuttle with "it comes from dheu". But "dheu" is meant to explain when someone die's. Dheu-Die, they sound the same. You have to realize my explanation for why "death" and "daath" come from the same thing is because of the definition of "daath" and it's correlation with "death" as well as the olde english variation of "dath". The Hebrew translation of "death" is "mavet". Why? Well since the English had a word called "death" which was based off "daath", but had a different definition, the Hebrew needed a word that would coincide with the English definition of death compared to theirs. Hence, mavet. Their understanding of death, which was a connection into this consciousness of unfathomable knowledge, was represented by the word "daath". The English represented death by the cessation of living organism, which we get death. So to Hebrew's, the cessation of a living organism, such as a human or animal, is represented by "mavet". I know the earlier examples didn't make sense, but hopefully this does.

And you might be thinking "Well Hebrew came before English so why would they have to make up another word? They didn't, Mavet was also personified as shown here...

"Mavet calls from His throat,
The Beloved meditates in His inwards:
"I alone am He who will rule over the Gods.
Yea command Gods and men.
Even dominate the multitudes of the earth."

English has taken quite a few words directly from Hebrew. But sometimes it was the other way around. Which of these words did not make its way from the European languages to Hebrew? The word "Babel" or, in modern Hebrew, "Bilbul" means "confusion." Guess what that is in English, Bible.


As for the Egyptian translation from "ma'at" meaning "truth", eventually turning into "math", does this not make sense? Yes, you could take any word and turn it into something else, but do you not agree that Math is the only truth in the universe? Ma'at/Math = Truth. This dropping of letters and addition of letters is constant throughout the history of language, I mean come on, just look at the Latin words and English words and how they are derived from Latin. They're not exactly the same, because someone dropped or added a vowel or letter.

As for the gift thing, you may be smart enough to not smoke DMT near a cliff, and I'm smart enough not to eat a gift, unless of course this gift was a shrimp cocktail. So now you know my weakness.

As for the Darth Vader thing. George Lucas was notorious for taking bits and pieces of reiligous text and facts and morphing them into the plot's and premise's for Star Wars, as you probably know.

So think of this. Daath = Knowledge. Darth = a blend of dark and death

So why couldn't Darth = knowledge, dark, and death. Seeing as how a Darth Lord undergoes intense training, and most likely some form of "ego-death" in order to complete his training. Also keep in mind, Annakin, aka Darth Vader, killed all the Jedi, the young Jedi, his wife, and got his arms and legs cut off. To me this sounds like death in the ultimate, something making you change your state of mind completely. Also, daath was a Hebrew word for knowledge and wisdom in a hiddern circle, or "The Abyss" as Aleister Crowley would call it, a "dark" occultist, and we all know George Lucas was an avid esoteric and studied Jewish mysticism, so it would make sense that he would have an understanding of the word "daath".

And for the DMT thing, ok they're structured differently. But you can't ingest DMT orally unless made into ayahuasca, and you can't smoke psycolibin. Unlike DMT which is smoked, and psycolibin is ingested. They will of course have different effects, just like smoking canibus and ingesting it, but they're still based off the same chemical structure, so I don't even know why you two are arguing.

 

Nah well cuz the dmt out of the chemical makeup of psilocybin would you still be able to make psilocybin or psilocycin? No you most likely wouldn't, therefore DMT is an essential building block in the formula, as for the 2 other active ingredients that contain no DMT they obviously have different effects on you, and on the psilocybin.

That is ridiculous information, and wrong, Morphine and Heroin are both opiates, and both EXTERMELY SIMILAR IN EFFECT, I have done both, don't even repeat this unless you have a link. Heroin isn't 4-hydroxy-morphine its
5alpha,6alpha)-7,8-Didehydro-4,5-epoxy-17-methylmorphinan-3,6-diol diacetate (ester. Usually just calle Diacetylmorphine.

As for the ozone thats all you, your right there, your wrong about the heroin. They are extremely similiar, all OPIODS COME FROM THE SAME ORIGINAL STEM THEIR ALL OPIUM DERIVATIVES, even though inside raw opium a few different chemicals exist. Heroin is derive from Morphine and AGAIN EXTREMELY SIMILAR. That is bullshit, the effects are usually unnoticable between heroin and morphine. Don't paste me some Erowid experience report either, I suggest you get some morphine suflate, sniff that. Then get some heroin and sniff that. They feel exactly the same, only morph is a little more "loopy". Same with IV injections. As for LSD and LSA, your wrong again, you are saying bullshit dude. Of course LSD is more potent, because it is refine and a much lower dose fucks you up with the vasoconstrictive nature of LSA. If you were to get a pure dose of LSA, not morning glory or that trash. IT IS AGAIN VERY SIMILAR TO LSD. How can you explain the Salem With hunt with ergot theory then? You obviously don't believe that which is what 80% of historians say nowadays. Ergot is what LSD is derived from, it is Lysergic Acid Dimethylide. Now as much as you wanna look like big science boy, you obviously haven't tried both of these substances. They ARE SIMILAR THOSE 2 examples were worthless.

You cannot say to me that without the Dmt psilocybin would exist, and therefore be able to be processed into psilocybin in side your body. I have tried 5-meo-dmt which is not in shrooms, and even is VERY SIMILAR TO SHROOMS. Almost exact considering it lasts only like a half hour when freebased. So I can't really compare NN Dmt with psilocybin. But you can compare it with 5-meo-dmt, because even Joe Rogan says there exactly the same only you get profound visuals with the n-n dmt. The body high is the same. It felt exactly the same as mushrooms.

Yea but your example wasn't a transliteration, it was a direct translation seeing as we use the same alphabet as the Germans. So whatever you say you are wrong right there with that.

How about Lesson? Lesson of holiness is closer.

Thats just stupid, don't bring fish into this.

As r33f3r pointed out George Lucas was an esoteric maniac. He loved mythology and religion, and drew most of his ideas of Star Wars from history, government, religion, and mysticism. Such as Jedi, coming from the Chinese word Jodai, meaning Jewish. Thats an obvious false transliteration by George Lucas, Yoda is another pronunciation of Jodai. Therefore those 2 main articles all came from this one source. The word Jewish in Chinese.

Like r33f3r pointed out again, in order to become an Initiated Sith, you must first become a sith style padawan, and prove your power of the dark side. Therefore with heavy training with your sith lord, you gained knowledge. As was the gnostic practive of initiation till self gnois. Daath is obviously where this comes from seeing as Lucas already drew on the Jodai Jewish thing. This means he has studied Jewish mysticism and has come across in Kabballah the idea of Daath.
Only after he pledged his loyalty and anger and hatred to everything, would be be granted a title meaning you have gained a great knowledge. Which is a COPY OF THE KABALLAH INITIATION, and GNOSTIC RITES. Unargueable, Dark my ass. What did a sith have to do with death? They avoided death, and wanted to live as long as they could, because they would join the darkness upon their death, and not be able to survive in the logos like a pure hearted Jedi, via an astral body connection. PLus the daath sphere is viewed as an abyss and portal between the Tree of Life to the Tree of death. Which is exactly the same except opposite and upsidedown. A perfect metaphor used by George Lucas as the Sith and Jedi. Also as means of knowledge(your not giving the word its true value, it is associated with intuitive knowledge and enlightenment) enlightenment is a portal between life and death. What did buddha do? He escaped samsara through enlightenment, he transcended the tree of life, and the tree of death, trhgouh divine knowledge (daath) using his proto 8 fold path.

 

Nimrod,

The word for "a Hebrew" in Hebrew is ivri. The language is ivrit. The word Hebrew evolved from that, and its evolution doesn't begin to look anything like the word "Hebrew" until it becomes a Greek word:

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Hebrew

So I think your theory is a little off.

Oh, and even though it would seem that the occult is completely forbidden biblically, it's really more like certain forms of it are forbidden. For example, the kohein gadol's breastplate could supposedly be used for divination by the king.

Back on the subject of da'at = death. Firstly, da'at is not a word used in a hidden circle (exclusively.) Da'at is just an ordinary word. It (and other words stemming from the same root) is used many times in the tanach. It takes on special meaning within kabbalah. Also, the kabbalistic circles were not hidden. They were well known.

Also, the word mavet is used biblically so I don't think it was created in order to differentiate itself from the English word death.

Oh, and George Lucas was born methodist, never was Jewish.

http://www.adherents.com/people/pl/George_Lucas.html

 

Reefer said he was Jewish not me. I meant the word death, in hebrew. Is that mavet like reefer said, you obviously know. Where did nekros come from? The greek word for death and even more Mort, the latin word.

 

Yea I fixed it, I always figured he was Jewish because of all the comparisons in Star Wars. WHOOPS.

 

Nimrod,

the last part of my post was not to you, but was general. Sorry for the confusion. My reply to you ended with the bolded letters. Mavet is Hebrew for death, and as I explain, it's used biblically so it couldn't have been created as a reaction to English.

The origin of nekros?

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=necro-

The origin of mort? This page might shed some light:

http://www.bartleby.com/61/roots/IE326.html

But you could just as easily have googled that info yourself.

 

Yea but that's my point, the correlation of death and mavet are the same, but death the english word is derived from daath, meaning "knowledge or wisdom". The term mavet is used to describe cessation of life, as is death. But death originally came from "daath", meaning knowledge or wisdom, then to Olde English, as "dath". That is the argument.

I agree with you how mavet was used biblically, but did also see how the Hebrew word Bilbul is translated into confusion? This would explain the confusin surrounding this argument because we may never know the truth behind it all. All I'm saying is the comparison is too similar for it not to be correct. And just like Nimrod said, you can't use gift in german to mean the same in English because it's the same alphabet, no transliteration.

 

reefer, you have yet to establish that da'at and death are related. Etymological references are against your interpretation, as is the meaning of the two words. You have not found any source to support you besides your own opinion. So why are you now bringing up the fact that there actually is a word in Hebrew that does mean death?

The translation of bilbul is another matter. The tanach regularly takes words and interprets them in that way which would best support what's going on in the text. Sometimes it will interpret a word one way in one place, and then interpret it another way in another location, or it will play around with one of the meanings. There's a lot of word play in the tanach. The individuals who wrote the Bavel narrative may very well have known the actual meaning of the words, as may have those who first heard the bavel narrative being read.

The case of bilbul which you have presented is an issue of the bible in its typical word play, in this case taking a foreign language word and interpreting it as hebrew (in this situation it seems to serve to poke fun at the ziggurats.)

The case of da'at/death is one of a Hebrew word becoming the common English word for death. Where is the precedent? Let's go with this for a minute. Let's say that one person in researching Hebrew did think that da'at was a lot like death and decided to make it into an English word. From there, it would have had to have been picked up as "the" word for death, in a context which has nothing to do with da'at. This also means that it would have had to have either replaced an earlier word for death, which most likely actually meant death, or that there was no word for death in old english and one was needed. This seems like a bit of a stretch to me.

 

I'm trying to show how da'at and death should have been related.

Like I said before, death was personified and changed from its original meaning.

Imagine if throughout our history, death was defined "as a realm of consciousness filled with unfathomable knowledge and wisdom" which is the definition of "daath". Do you think people would be afraid of dying? Of course, death would also describe someone whos vitals ceased to function. Do you think they would believe in Hell? No. This is basically a ploy in my eyes used by the founders of our modern language and the Chruch authorities. It has been institutionalized in our psyche that we should fear death and God is the only one who can save us from HELL. My point is, why can't death have a double meaning? Just like tons of words in every langauge have double meanings. So instead of thinking death as merely just ceasing to live, it would also be a portal to this realm that we as mortal's cannot describe, as we have not died. BUT, we can experience it to an extent, with the help of DMT, psycolibin, salvia, etc. to give as a chance to understand it so when it does happen, hopefully when we're all old, we are familiar with this "death", this seperate realm.

I find it ridiculous to think that death is merely ceasing to function, when a word like "daath", which describes itself as being "a realm of knowledge and wisdom". Gnostics also use the term daath because of their study in the Kabbalah. Daath and Gnosis, both mean knowledge. So why can't death have a double meaning? That is my point.

Of course people will argue "How can we say when we die there is something else? Who can prove that?" Like I said, experiences with DMT, which is part of the dying process, as well as Near Death Experiences. Just because someone see's a white light doesn't mean it's because of hospital lights. What about near death experiences of blind people? - http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence03.html

This "death" opinion of mine is not restricted to religion or dogma. I am not one to say right away we receive this knowledge or wisdom. Maybe that is why meditation and studies of psychoactive substances can help us to understand this dimension better.

Everyword has a derivative, and I find it silly to think that death could not have come from daath, it's just too similar to my views on death for me to think likewise. Maybe you think death is just a person dying and thats it, so I can understand why this could not be accepted. Also, if trying to use logical arguments and etymologies to prove this is wrong, well there are plenty of examples to show how words have changed meaning through time and adopted specific defintions or letter structure. Why should this not be the case for death?

 

What do you mean by should have?

What does imagining something have to do with proofs? And I think you're misunderstanding the way the word realm is used. Da'at is not a place. You can't visit da'at. Assiyah, yetzirah, briyah, atzilut; those could better be thought of as places. Da'at is an emanation, reflecting one of the ways that God interacts with the world. Oh, and I'd like to point out that what this whole conversation stems from, the idea that one cannot go past da'at, is just one system of kabbalah. In other systems, the answer will be different. For example:

"Keter is the uppermost aspect of the Sefirot that can be contemplated by humans."

http://www.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/Sefirot/Keter.html

Not in my psyche. I'm Jewish. There is no Jewish hell. And Judaism places too much emphasis on this life to really get caught up worrying about death in my experience.

If you're including me in this group, I don't know why. I have never once argued for or against the existence of an afterlife. I'm merely arguing against connecting the word da'at with the word death. Whether or not there is an afterlife, and what this afterlife consists of, has nothing to do with my part in this discussion.

But those are your views, not the majority views of those who spoke Old English.

Etymologies have been supplied to you showing the way the word death evolved. You have not produced any counter-etymologies, nor have you answered any of the real world challenges against such a transformation in meaning arising. I understand this fits into your belief system in some important way, but beliefs do not a solid argument make.

 

accidental post

 

Here is my etymology for my argument.

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

daath, dath, deeth, death.

oh, and if you want to say it derives from dheu, the definition of dheu is "to die", not death itself. I could also go as far to say data stems from daath, but i've already gotenough to argue about ; )

 

I'm talking about an etymology from a different source, not something you came up with yourself. All the sources point to dheu, sources generated by people who went to school for this stuff.

And how can you criticize the fact that dheu means "to die" when da'at doesn't mean anything related to death?

You also haven't answered any of the real-world challenges that have been presented to you for how this word could have transformed as you say it did.

How could da'at come to mean death to Old English speakers who did not hold your beliefs about death?

How could this word come to replace another word that did actually mean literal death or, how could there have been a need for the word death in the Old English language, such that one person's adoption of it in literature would lead to its widespread use as "the" word for death? How could it have spread in such a way without the invention of a printing press?

I believe there were other real world issues that were raised, but that's good enough for now.

 

You're wrong about this.

And I proved it earlier.

Dheu is the root for all of those words: Death, die, dead.

Don't reiterate arguments when they have already been disproven.

Yes, it does have quite a few Hebrew words.

Death is not one of them, as shown previously.

Beyond that, the Bible -- from Bilbul/Babel, is a Hebrew text. Death is not an explicitly Hebrew concept.

It makes absolutely no sense. Math is a shortening of mathematics.

"math c.1380 as singular, replaced by early 17c. by mathematics (1581), from L. mathematica (pl.), from Gk. mathematike tekhne "mathematical science," fem. sing. of mathematikos (adj.) "relating to mathematics, scientific," from mathema (gen. mathematos) "science, knowledge, mathematical knowledge," related to manthanein "to learn," from PIE base *mn-/*men-/*mon- "to think, have one's mind aroused" (cf. Gk. menthere "to care," Lith. mandras "wide-awake," O.C.S. madru "wise, sage," Goth. mundonsis "to look at," Ger. munter "awake, lively")."

Math did not come from "ma'at".

Math came from mathetmatics. Which stemmed originally from munter.

It has absolutely nothing to do with Hebrew or Egyptian.

Are you incapable of understanding this?

No, it is not the only truth in the Universe.

Of course, you have this silly idea that I am some kind of boring little atheist/agnostic person that only believes in math and science.

Gee, because ...

There is no connection here?

This is a simplified version of your argument.

Premise 1: A is B.
Premise 2: C is both D and E.
Conclusion 1: C is all of D, E, and B.

You are not making any connection between "darth" and "knowledge/daath" whatsoever, other than the fact that the transliteration is spelled similar.

In fact, "da'ath" does not even sound the same as darth. There is no "a" sound, or "r" sound. And the "th" sound is controversial -- it could also have been a simple "t" sound.

True. And this is a testament to just how different DMT and psilocybin are. One of them can't be smoked, the other one can't be taken orally in its pure form.

And we're arguing because he's saying that DMT is the reason why psilocybin has the effects it does -- which is entirely untrue.

Actually, it is possible now to synthesize (unusably small amounts of) psilocybin or any other molecule, without starting from DMT.

Modern computers are now able to synthesize molecules directly from the raw elements (carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, etc.).

DMT, while it is an essential part of the molecule, it has nothing to do with the molecule other than being a part of it.

Yeah, I'll admit to being wrong there. I got that information from a site that was pretty much entirely wrong ... so I concede that.

Actually, I have tried both of them, and I'm not wrong about this one. They had very different effects, different dosages, and they also affect different receptors in the brain.

Ergot is a fungus, not a chemical. Ergot contains ergotamine, which can then be extracted and processed through chemical reactions into LSD.

Ergot is not lysergic acid diethylamide, nor is ergotamine.

I never did say that, nor am I trying to.

It can be synthesized without it, in very small amounts, in laboratories. Without DMT, it would not have come into existance naturally, nor would we know about it.

Actually, our alphabet is slightly different than the Germans. I know, I speak both English and German.

The German alphabet uses umlauts and different vowel sounds. It also has an "esset" character, which looks like this: ß

"Gift" can be properly transliterated as "gift" because the letters are the same.

But "gift" is transliterated as "gift." It is absolutely a transliteration, because if it was a direct translation, it would not be "gift," it would be "poison."

Translation of dalet ayin tav: knowledge
Transliteration of dalet ayin tav: da'at or daath or da'ath
Translation of g-i-f-t: poison
Transliteration of g-i-f-t: gift

Lesson == Leshon (language) == Lesion

None of them are related.

That's my entire point. Not even lesson comes close to language.

That is my entire point!

The way I turned "tnu'ot" into "trout" is the same way you are turning "ma'at" into "math" and "da'at" into "death"!!

Your argument is just stupid, don't bring death into this, if you don't want to hear about fish and lesions.

This whole argument is a moot point -- even if you won it (which I won't continue it because it doesn't matter), it has nothing to do with da'at and death.

Who knows, maybe George Lucas is insane and maybe he did pick it for whatever reason. Even if that were true, George Lucas is one person, not the hundreds of millions that speak English and say "death."

No, originally you were trying to show how they WERE related.

Besides, "should have" has nothing to do with this. If you were trying to show how a word "should have" evolved from another word -- it didn't evolve that way, so on what grounds can you say that it "should have" been?

If you had said "should have" to begin with, I could have dismissed it as ramblings about 5 pages ago.

Of course -- death ISN'T defined this way.

It's not a question of "can death have a double meaning?"

It's a question of "does death have a double meaning?"

Actually -- that's not even true.

It's more a question of, "does death come from da'at?"

Which has already been shown to be false.

Welcome to the English language, where death and daath are conclusively unrelated!

You might find it ridiculous.

But I bet English finds you ridiculous too, perverting its words the way you do, and twisting meanings to suit your interpretations.

So your entire argument is based on something as unstable as "experiences with DMT"?

I rest my case. You have no argument whatsoever, other than what a bunch of people who are tripping their balls off think.

Oh boy. Do I need to go back and quote you saying this?

Here we go ... *dives in*

"To me death is nothing but a doorway into another realm, unfathomable by our minds at this point in time. Once we experience this "doorway", the light at the end of the tunnel many NDE's. This is the knowledge and wisdom we receive"

"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."

Let me explain something to you, reefer.

It is not that death COULDN'T have come from daath.

It's that death DIDN'T come from daath.

And that's an etymological, historal fact.

YOUR views on death may be similar to YOUR views on daath.

But YOUR views are not the views of the hundreds of millions of people that speak English.

Again, you are failing to separate "death" from "afterlife."

Death is just a person dying.

The afterlife, is anything else that comes after "death."

Death is just a person dying. That is the definition of death.

(R)Amen.

When are you going to understand that "death" and "die" and "dead" ARE DIFFERENT FORMS OF THE SAME INFINITIVE (WORD)?

Death is noun form!
Die is verb form!
Dead is adjective form!

THEY ARE THE SAME WORD IN DIFFERENT USAGES.

They are ALL derived from dheu (I proved this using etymology before).

And secondly, this is a total bullshit etymology, you made it up yourself.

I'm sorry, but you clearly do not know anything about etymology -- you are not qualified to bullshit word etymologies.

 

Well I didn't have any atheist or whatever thoughts in mind when I thought of math being the only truth to the universe. But anyways, as far as this conversation goes, I think we can prove the etymology isn't the same I guess. I still am clinging to the dath Olde English form, but to hell with etymologies, who knows where words truly come from and how they managed to withstand the tests of time and cultural influence. I guess what I've been trying to say is the term "death" was based off "daath", whether or not the etymologies coincide or not. Just because etymologies change does that mean definition must change as well? In this case, well in my opinion, it did.

But anyways, back to the original beginning post. No, I am not afraid of death. My main point of this thread was try and change people's views on our definition of death, with the help of a word like "daath" that means "knowledge, wisdom, mind, etc". Also referred to as the Hidden Circle or Great Abyss. When I think of death I picture this Abyss of knowledge unfathomable to my puny existence.

You really didn't prove to me anything with your Indo-European dheu reference. Look for the etymology of any word and compare it to the Indo-European root, and it will look nothing like it's present form. So tell me how comes death isnt spelled Dheuth or something ridiculous like that? How did it go from having d-h-e-u to d-e-a-t-h? You probably can't answer that, and neither can I because we don't know the influence at the time. Maybe it was Hebrew that influenced the change, with daath, which is what I beleive.

 

The people who discover and record the etymologies.

And ... that's wrong ... and that's pretty much what the dauer and I have been trying to say all along.

Etymologies don't change -- only evolve.

And the definitions were different to begin with.

-----

Either way, it was a good argument.

/bow

 

Hold on I edited my argument, go back above

 

Ok, well besides an etymological view of the words, would you agree that by reading the definition of daath/da'at one could see how they would be related to death?

Even with etymology, the Indo-European root shouldn't be a factor seeing as how we don't know in what time period the words were changed. Type in any word in www.dictionary.com and look at the indo-euro root, every word is so different compared to the present form. For instance, when I type "god" I get gheu.

Yet when we type death, we get deeth and dath, which are close to the form of daath da'at.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

lol the only reason I quoted this is because of the dxm thing. I just pictured all these people and DMX in the midst of it all barking screamin "where my dogs at?!?!?!?!"

But yea, I knew what you meant, dxm

anyways...

 

I am Slightly Worried...