I was pointing out that Dan Brown and other modern authors missed the fact that events, personalities, and places, in the Grail and other legends, without exception refer to organs, systems, and functions within the human being connected with the myth of human perfectibility.
The myth of occult anatomy refers to the method known as the ‘The Great Work’ which requires a ‘Great Effort’ in order to attain ‘The Great Art’ and discover ‘The Great Secret’ of ‘The Sacred Marriage’, said in the tradition literature to be connected with the functioning of the Third ventricle - Pituitary gland - Pineal ganglia complex.
So when you say: “Seriously, can’t you give a brief summary?” you may now perhaps see that such an approach to such a vast a subject may serve but to trivialize it.
A text worthy of serious consideration in this context, but not easy reading, is “The Comte de Gabalis”, a very careful reading of which will tend to point you in the direction of the genuine modern operations of the myth.
Oh, come on, maatorc, cut the crap. There is no subject in the world that can’t be reasonably introduced in a couple of paragraphs. If you don’t want to discuss or explain it, why did you bring it up? And why should Cecil have mentioned it if anything less than a book-length discussion is “trivializing” it?
Why don’t you start by telling me what the third ventrical is? Or why the pineal gland is significant? It’s in the brain, right? What does it do that makes it connected with Jesus?
Pretend you’re explaining it to a child or to your mother…
I’ve been trying to follow what you’re talking about maatorc; really I have. But what it comes down to is this:
The “overlying trivia” are actual historical facts.
The “underlying ideas” are whatever Manly Palmer Hall dreamed up that connects them.
I’m sure if I was willing to put the time into it, I could show that every single one of the “several legends of the myth” repeatedly involves a tree, or the number 27, or the concept of life and death.
Correlation is not causation, and from what I’ve seen here, your thesis has about as much credibility as astrology, numerology, or telling the future through sheep entrails.
There’s no way to say this without sounding hostile, but this is the worst cop-out you could have posted. We have cogent threads discussing quantum mechanics, aerodynamics, and economics, all subjects at least a vast and detailed as this subject. You have yet to post anything that doesn’t amount to: “I have some secret knowledge I’m not sharing with you all, you have to find it yourselves, but Cecil should have said it.”
If you can’t talk about it, how in the world can you criticize Cecil for not acknowledging it in the original column? Either it is such a huuuuuuge subject that it wouldn’t fit into the original column (which has a very firm word count limit being intended for dead-tree media), or your thesis is a load of nonsense.
I can’t honestly tell which possibility is more likely from your posts, but each dodge of a question leans me in one direction over the other.
Well, we just recovered 1,300,000 old deleted posts, and I think we have enough space to squeeze in his proof. Then we can follow up with a proof that all myths actually have their basis in bunny poop.
Something is being missed by posters here.
A ‘legend’ is a device to transmit a myth.
A ‘Myth’ is a knowledge system
I am saying the myth of occult anatomy exists, not that it is true or false.
Contrary to appearances the legends are not historical records of actual events.
Dan Brown and other recent writers make physical facts of the purely symbolic ‘characters’, ‘places’ and ‘events’ in the legends.
An excellent example of a legend-myth is “The Iliad” by Homer which transmits the myth of the Precession which was well understood by the Ancients.