Stele of Revealing
Joshua O'Brien
If it's in the Cairo Museum, what's its item number?
J. Karlin
> Where is the Stele of Revealing thes days?
> If it's in the Cairo Museum, what's its item number?
This is the best site for the Stele, though the part devoted
to my upstaging of the author is a bit biased (understandable
given his apparently sincere devotion to this form
of Nessy):
The item numbers change periodically, it was 666 for some
time but not today. Whenever a new number is given the
artifact, believers scramble about trying to make the
number reveal the stele in the accepted fashion, in other
words as Thelemically significant. There was a discussion
about this on alt.magick back in 2000 sometime where the
present number (at least back then) was discussed. I'm sure
you can google it up.
But as I have pointed out before, "666" wasn't significant
by its absence or scarcity in 1904, but rather by its
abundance in the Cairo Museum on the glorious day.
So it wasn't too difficult or demanding of divine museum
guidance to locate an example out of which to carve
a religion.
(jk)
**********************************************
Read jk's Tarot FAQ:
http://jktarot.com/faq.html
Read The most important Tarot essays ever written:
http://jktarot.com/jkbooks.html
**********************************************
Hieronymous707
>So it wasn't too difficult or demanding of divine museum
>guidance to locate an example out of which to carve
>a religion.
Whoa, dude, like totally Gestalt. I dig exactly where you're comin' from on
that. It's like this whole Walter's Art Gallery thing. I mean, the way it's
laid out and all, from the manuscripts to the Egyptian artifacts to the
tapestries and everything, it's like some museum curator went about trying to
establish a definitive, evidentiary link, a 'Tarot Timeline" of sorts.
I don't know if they meant to do that or not, of course. I have absolutely
nothing to do with Curatorial Affairs, so please don't Flood them with phone
calls, but no matter how skeptical you are, you can hardly walk through the
exhibits with Tarot in mind and not see exactly what I'm talking about.
Coincidence? Maybe.
It may also be yet another example of the
awesome and incredible Power of Cheese.
-hi-
Hieronymous707
Whoa, dude, like totally Gestalt.
I dig exactly where you're comin' from on that.
It's like this whole Walter's Art Gallery thing.
I mean, the way it's laid out and all,
from the manuscripts
to the Egyptian artifacts
to the tapestries
and everything,
it's like some museum curator
went about trying
to establish a definitive,
evidentiary
link,
a 'Tarot Timeline"
of sorts.
>I don't know if they meant to do that or not, of course.
...
>I have absolutely nothing to do with Curatorial Affairs,
>so please don't Flood them with phone calls,
hahahaha, funny. Liz Flood is the Administrator of Curatorial Affairs at The
Walters Art Museum. http://216.25.100.145/html/contact.asp?ID=81
>but no matter how skeptical you are, you can hardly walk through the
>exhibits with Tarot in mind and not see exactly what I'm talking about.
Which, by the way, is pretty much what what's-his-name was talking about in his
original essay.
>Coincidence?
Hardly.
Sometimes what you see is not what you hear, and sometimes what you say, well
... for example:
>It may also be yet another example of the
>awesome and incredible Power of Cheese.
If you were listening, and I mean really listening, you might have heard that
as, "... the awesome and incredible power of chi's*.", which would have given
the whole comment a different flavor, a different slant, a different ring
altogether. Just thought I'd mention it as something to think about.
-hi-
Rhianna
wrote:
>>From: hierony...@aol.com (Hieronymous707)
>
>Whoa, dude, like totally Gestalt.
>I dig exactly where you're comin' from on that.
>It's like this whole Walter's Art Gallery thing.
>I mean, the way it's laid out and all,
>from the manuscripts
>to the Egyptian artifacts
>to the tapestries
>and everything,
>it's like some museum curator
>went about trying
>to establish a definitive,
>evidentiary
>link,
>a 'Tarot Timeline"
>of sorts.
You are really tempting me as you beckon all to the
museum.
~Cheers~
Rhianna
http://www.pipeline.com/~rhianna/index.htm
Hieronymous707
> You are really tempting me as you beckon all to the
>museum.
Is that what you think I'm doing?
...
Well, I guess I can see how you'd think that. I have been sort of pressing the
issue around here lately I suppose. Fact is, I think it's a great museum. If
you're in the area, you should check it out. If you're really into Tarot, I
think you'll find many of the exhibits as interesting, if not compelling, as I
do, including but not limited to the Petrarch manuscript.
-hi-
Rhianna
wrote:
I like to visit museums wherever I go.
~Cheers~
Rhianna
http://www.pipeline.com/~rhianna/index.htm
Hieronymous707
> I like to visit museums wherever I go.
Yeah, well, you were here once but didn't visit the Walters. Just thought I'd
give you, or whoever, a little heads up.
-hi-
Rhianna
wrote:
>>From: rhi...@pipeline.com (Rhianna)
Thanks, I appreciate that.
>
>-hi-
~Cheers~
Rhianna
http://www.pipeline.com/~rhianna/index.htm
Joseph Count de Money
> On 20 Jul 2002 18:10:16 GMT, hierony...@aol.com (Hieronymous707)
> wrote:
>
> >>From: rhi...@pipeline.com (Rhianna)
> >
> >> I like to visit museums wherever I go.
> >
> >Yeah, well, you were here once but didn't visit the Walters. Just
> thought I'd
> >give you, or whoever, a little heads up.
>
> Thanks, I appreciate that.
> >
> >-hi-
>
it was not that long ago this issue was discussed in some depth here,
including an extensive quoting from a museum guide that someone, i
forget who, posted, a google group search should elicit the information.
--
Joseph ( The probability for an event which can happen in two
indistinguishable ways is the sum of the probability for each way
considered separately) Count de Money.
Hieronymous707
>it was not that long ago this issue was discussed in some depth here,
>including an extensive quoting from a museum guide that someone, i
>forget who, posted, a google group search should elicit the information.
As I recall, Joshua O'Brien mentioned something about the Archimedes manuscript
that's there, and I think Steve Franklin commented about a particular Greek
ceramic piece with the image of a Chariot on it, and of course, I mentioned the
Petrarch and Crusader Bible manuscripts. They probably even have a stele
around there somewhere too. It really is a great place, with lots of unique
items serendipitously juxtaposed. It's like ... totally Tarot, dude. Foreal.
-hi-
Joshua O'Brien
>
> Joshua O'Brien wrote:
>
> > Where is the Stele of Revealing thes days?
> > If it's in the Cairo Museum, what's its item number?
>
> This is the best site for the Stele, though the part devoted
> to my upstaging of the author is a bit biased (understandable
> given his apparently sincere devotion to this form
> of Nessy):
>
> http://www.duaut.net
Thanks for posting this. Unfortunately my connection in Luxor was dodgy
and I could only read the first few pages before I left. Maybe next time,
eh?
> The item numbers change periodically, it was 666 for some
> time but not today. Whenever a new number is given the
> artifact, believers scramble about trying to make the
> number reveal the stele in the accepted fashion, in other
> words as Thelemically significant.
That's pretty amusing. You'd think they'd bribe the cataloguer.
> There was a discussion
> about this on alt.magick back in 2000 sometime where the
> present number (at least back then) was discussed. I'm sure
> you can google it up.
I wasn't much interested in the number other than to locate the
stele and see whether it actually said 'hadit' or not.
According to one Edfu local, once a year the priests set the statue of
Horus in a solar boat and carried it to the roof of the temple to bathe it
in sunlight. Seems a similar motif to Waite's six of swords.
J. Karlin
> > http://www.duaut.net
> Thanks for posting this. Unfortunately my connection in Luxor was dodgy
> and I could only read the first few pages before I left. Maybe next time,
> eh?
It does have an oblique design.
> That's pretty amusing. You'd think they'd bribe the cataloguer.
I've not discounted that possibility. The website owner however
sent me an image he claimed represented the original exhibit
card, with 666, still sitting in front of the stele. That was
his claim. One would think they'd update those things, at least
once a century or so.
> I wasn't much interested in the number other than to locate the
> stele---
Same place it was in 1904. That is the artifact is in the same
museum. But that's just the artifact. The Stele of Revealing
is something else and is somewhere else.
> and see whether it actually said 'hadit' or not.
It doesn't say "Hadit". That's an invention by way of a lousy
translation. In fact, the OTOers developed an entire dogma
(or procedure) to explain away that mistake.
Here, this might be interesting to you (in fact, the whole thread
might be interesting to you):
> According to one Edfu local, once a year the priests set the statue of
> Horus in a solar boat and carried it to the roof of the temple to bathe it
> in sunlight. Seems a similar motif to Waite's six of swords.
No, Waite's motif is something else---don't recall right now,
in my notes. But the waters kind of explain it, if you think
about it.
Joshua O'Brien
>
> Joshua O'Brien wrote:
>
>
> I've not discounted that possibility. The website owner however
> sent me an image he claimed represented the original exhibit
> card, with 666, still sitting in front of the stele. That was
> his claim. One would think they'd update those things, at least
> once a century or so.
When is the picture claimed to have been taken? Unfortunately, the great
majority of artifacts the days are displayed sans information.
Luckily, my guide was more than forthcoming with useful facts like the
existence of a race of pharaonic servant-dwarves who escaped from the
alien gravity of the great pyramid via secret tunnels.
> > I wasn't much interested in the number other than to locate the
> > stele---
>
> Same place it was in 1904. That is the artifact is in the same
> museum. But that's just the artifact. The Stele of Revealing
> is something else and is somewhere else.
>
> > and see whether it actually said 'hadit' or not.
>
> It doesn't say "Hadit". That's an invention by way of a lousy
> translation. In fact, the OTOers developed an entire dogma
> (or procedure) to explain away that mistake.
I suppose that's the Stele of Revealing you mean.
> Here, this might be interesting to you (in fact, the whole thread
> might be interesting to you):
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?q=stele+revealing+hadit+karlin&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=34F99B70.B4A1A3B5%40texas.net&rnum=2
Thanks, that's interesting reading. It was actually an earlier article in
the thread that sparked an interest in verifying the stele.
> > According to one Edfu local, once a year the priests set the statue of
> > Horus in a solar boat and carried it to the roof of the temple to bathe it
> > in sunlight. Seems a similar motif to Waite's six of swords.
>
> No, Waite's motif is something else---don't recall right now,
> in my notes. But the waters kind of explain it, if you think
> about it.
Birth of a son, I think. Not too sure about the journey aspect though:
maybe a reference to Joseph and Mary's flight from Herod.
On <http://www.sacred-texts.com/tarot/pktsw06.htm> it gives
"commissionary", but I recall it as "commissary". Anyone have a
PKT handy to check this?
Hieronymous707
>On <http://www.sacred-texts.com/tarot/pktsw06.htm> it gives
>"commissionary", but I recall it as "commissary". Anyone have a
>PKT handy to check this?
The word it seems that you recall, in PKT I refer to,
is not upon the page at all that I can see, page 242.
-hi-