(urth) Typhon's nature

[David Stockhoff]

On 10/16/2011 4:49 PM, Lee Berman wrote:
>> Gerry Quinn: I notice you don’t mention Typhon’s father.  Could that be something
>> to do with the fact that his father was TARTARUS?
>
>
> I think that is a good question, though the assumption that I ought to be addressing
>
> all the complexities of all the issues of these stories in one post is rather an
>
> unrealistic expectation. Neither did I address the indirect relationship of
>
> mythological Typhon to Phaea. She was the human caretaker of one of Typhon and
>
> Echidna's monstrous offspring, the Hus Krommyon or Crommoyon Sow. And no, I'm not
>
> going to discuss Babby at this time.
Please do!
> Anyway regarding Tartaros, I think this is another example of the father-son sequence
>
> confusion which is tangentially introduced througout the Sun series but is most explicitly
>
> stated in RttW.
Huh. Yes, the frequency with which these things occur---Silk and his 
father, Horn and his sons---suggests that it may need a closer look as 
its own phenomenon, rather than just a result of (or clue to) other 
problems.
> As has been suggested in the past I think this has its basis in the father-son confusion
>
> of ambiguous gender Dionysus being a primeval Greek deity who gave rise to the Titans and
>
> Olympians and their paternalistic kings Chronos and Zeus. One of Zeus' offspring was then
>
> ambiguous gender Dionysus who was a primary deity (in various guises) during the pre-Christian
>
> period centered across what was Alexander's empire.
>
>
>
> I think it is the belief of many pagan cults that the paternalistic Christian religion
>
> which now dominates so much of the Western world will one day be again supplanted by
>
> worship of the hermaphroditic, One True God, Dionysus, Great God Pan, The Green Man or
>
> various other names he goes by.  Son-Father-Son-Father-Son gods...etc. It is confusing
>
> and I think WOlfe is astute in recognizing that gnostic confusion in this story.
>
Very nice! Tangentially, one could argue that the question of what to do 
with the Trinity when presenting an alternative, pre-Christ mythology is 
its own problem. That is, ones, twos, and threes become significant, for 
better or worse. Avoid 3 or go with something else? If not 3-in-1, why 
not 2-in-one? (Consider the monoecious plant, with 2 sexes in one 
"house.") And never mind that we still don't know who Christ's mother was!

Two-in-one divinity takes one right back to divine incest, of course. A 
hermaphroditic Deity represents an ideal union of what here on Earth is 
forever divided. A self-pollinating "God" would fit right in, in Briah, 
with its perpetual, cyclical regeneration.

Remind you of anyone, Lee?


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 111016-1, 10/16/2011
Tested on: 10/16/2011 5:19:37 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2011 AVAST Software.
http://www.avast.com