Sitchin, Zecharia. The 12th Planet.
Hit chapter five this morning over coffee. Finally getting interesting! Have any of you out there read this book, and would you like to discuss here? I know I am a late-comer to his library, but better late than never!
Namaste from the Midwest,
Love the Book
I love the book, bought it years ago - 3 times and each time someone borrowed the copies and never returned them. I gave up since I didn't seem to be able to stop lending them! Maybe sometime I'll get another copy...and hide it. : ) It's fascinating. He wrote quite extensively. Nice photo.
Thanks for the response, Sandra. I think you should definitely get another copy for yourself and join my little reading club here. I'm almost 1/2 through the darn thing now, and as I previously stated--it's getting durn interesting. My skeptical left-brain/lawyer-brain is having a little bit of trouble--at times--not engaging in debates in my mind with some of Sitchin's propositions. Again, I am only 1/2 through and maybe later he fills in a bunch of the holes that I seem to be seeing right now. For example, he often shows an illustration of a piece of a tablet from somewhere (yet does not cite where it came from, where it is now, how it was discovered, etc.), then makes the logical leap that the cylinder shaped object is "of course" a rocket ship. Now, maybe it is, but maybe it's not. My heart is certainly open to the possibility, but I don't think you can just look at an image with your 20th (or 21st) century lens and say, "ahha!" without digging deeper and making the connections without the assumptions.
But . . . I am confident that as I read further, he will make the connections. I am looking forward to that.
What I find more interesting is the progression of languages that he explores. How in the world did the word for "sky vehicle" become "name"? As he suggests, and I agree, the transformation of the word certainly obscures its origins and "real" meaning. However, I find it very magical that a name--my name, your name, etc.--could be some primordial attempt in which we all engage to make our own connection to the divine. With one word--a name--we create our own "sky vehicle" to the heavens.
p.s. Glad you liked the photo. I usually do not drink my coffee that milky--usually black--but was indulging that morning.
I love your questioning mind. I tend to take things at face value. Then when I read someone else's questions, I think, yeah, that is true--why didn't I think of that? So thanks for sharing your thoughts. If you find the answer to your questions, let us know.
By the way, I loved your photo also. Looks like a perfect way to start the day!
Coffee, aliens & names
Yes, his books are filled with many details and theories. Out of it all and along with others there is a theme that resonates for the bigger picture.
Well, coffee is almost like his theories and details - so many brands, flavors and ways to serve it!
The idea of links via ones names is quite romantic and also the suggestion of links to the universe is something I think anyway.
It sounds like you've absorbed much and are maintaining it to ponder and consider - that's great! That's the kind of mind needed in the New Age to sort through the myriad of 'stuff' and create some sort of balance. When I teach intuitive development one of my main criteria is to learn discernment that is also usually the last thing most want to exercise as it can take away the fantasy rather than working to have validated and significant data.
Will look for your other postings and evaluations.
Sitchin, astrology, coffee & poetry
Hello Sandra (and all)!
This weekend as I was reading Sitchin again on the patio, the sun struck my glass coffee mug at just the right angle to create a reflection of the mug's logo on the coffee. Looks like a fancy Teamster latte, eh?
Speaking of the sun . . . the planets . . . that brings us back to Sitchin . . . reading this book just reminds me of how very little I know and how very much I need to read and explore and learn and absorb. If only I could quit the job and read all day long every day (with a hike or two in between), then . . . perhaps . . . I would have a chance . . .
As I mentioned in prior posts, what I find least compelling about Sitchin's theories are his propensity to take art and writings at literally--as if they are not symbolic of anything other than what the text literally says or what the picture literally looks like (again, through a 20th/21st century lens). For example, I just read the sentence, "But why not take the epic at face value, as nothing more nor less than the statement of cosmologic facts." (p. 211 of my edition). I suppose the answer to my knee-jerk question of "why?!" is "why not?" Okay, that's valid, but my western-educational background of grad school and law just throw up all kinds of questions and skepticism. When I read historical documents, I tend to come from the assumption that it is highly symbolic and almost impossible to accurately interpret historically. But yes, I suppose I need to ask the questions "why not?" and "maybe it is a true historical document and not poetry or literature?" . . .
What I DO find most compelling about Sitchin's theories so far are (1) his linguistic explorations; and (2) his exploration of astrological knowledge and that the Sumerians knew more about astrology than their successors. Perhaps I find these theories--the latter in particular--most compelling due to my lack of knowledge on the topic. One of these theories is that the Sumerians actually knew that the planet was not flat and that it (along with other planets) orbited around the sun. They knew about each and every one of the plants in our solar system, the Earth's moon, etc. before later civilizations apparently forgot it and had to relearn it (why do we have to relearn things?! So frustrating!) So . . . if they were right about all of this, why wouldn't they be correct about this one other detail in their understanding of the solar system--the 12th planet. Sandra, perhaps you could shed some light on Sitchin's theories here--in particular (so far), Chapter 6 called "The Twelfth Planet"?
I have been reading a lot of poetry lately, and this morning was listening to Coleman Barks read his translations of the mystic Rumi. One poem stands out in my mind during this discussion of the planets, the sun, etc. I share it with you here:
"Turn as the earth and the moon turn,
circling what they love.
Whatever circles come from the center."
Not only do we (and nature) circle what we love, but at the same time, we (who are doing the circling) are part of that center and that one big love.
Again . . . as Rumi wrote,
"I am so small
how can this great love be inside of me?"
But it is in me, you, and us all. . . .It always comes back to that, doesn't it?
I will stop my rambling now . . .
Namaste from the Midwest, Friends.
P.S. Ironically, one paragraph after that Sitchin sentence about accepting an epic at face value and as fact, he launches into a 10+ page dissertation that interprets the epic as an allegory explaining the creation of the planets and Earth, etc. Ha! Busted, Sitchin! Maybe he will tie this allegory back to fact later?...now I am confused as to what is fact and what is fiction. Wait, they are the same, no? The Buddha might say so.
Namaste from the Midwest,
change in perspective?
I have to say that upon finishing Chapter 7 "The Epic of Creation" this morning and beginning my drive into the office, I felt a change in perspective. As I drove, the moon was still looming in the western morning sky, and I felt a sense of . . . imagination and creativity (those are the best words I can harness right now to describe the feeling) . . . as I stared in wonder at "Kingu," as Sitchin calls the Moon in that chapter.
It felt like a small opening.
Huh? . . . Interesting!
Namaste from the Midwest,
Questions and Observations
I apologize for this long list of questions and observations, but I simply cannot help it while reading this book. Since nobody I know around me in my life here in the Midwest is reading this book, I am hoping one of you here are familiar with this work (Sandra? Others?) and would like to engage in a conversation:
Chapter 8, “Kingship of Heaven”
• What version of the Bible is he using? (p. 252). I believe he mentions it somewhere, but I cannot find the citation now. Is it the same version everytime? I am certainly not familiar with any type of translation like this.
• Is he skipping around Chapter/Verse?
• Sitchen states, “Is there life as we know it anywhere besides the planet Earth? Scientists now know that there are innumerable galaxies like ours . . . offering billions of chances of Life?” (p. 253). Question: why “life” with a lowercase at the beginning and then “Life” (capitalized)? What does he mean by "Life" with a capital "L"?
• Sitchin states, “Why is there only one genetic code for all terrestrial life? If life started in a primeval “soup,” as most biologists believe, organisms with a variety of genetic codes should have developed.” (p. 256). Anyone care to discuss? Or, anyone have a biology background? I believe I've heard SM proffer this question many times. Not sure if she's ever gotten an answer.
• Sitchin questions, “Why does the element molybdenum play a key role in enzymatic reactions that are essential to life, when molybdenum is a very rare element? Why are elements that are more abundant on Earth, such as chromium or nickel, so unimportant in biochemical reactions?” (p. 256). Again, this is a question I've heard SM ponder and, again, not sure if she's gotten a reasonable answer. Can anyone here shed some light on this very intriguing question that, like the previous questions, seems to suggest life on this planet has ET origins.
Chapter 9, “Landing on Planet Earth”
• Early in the chapter, Sitchin observes, “Scholars have been unable to understand a statement by Gudea, king of Lagash, that ‘the celestial 7 is 50.’ . . . Gudea stated that the celestial body that is ‘seven’ stands for the god that is ‘fifty.’ The god Enlil, whose rank number was fifty, had as his celestial counterpart the planet seventh.” (pp. 259-60).
Questions: (1) Who is Gudea? Did I miss this? And, (2) Why does Enlil rank as the number fifty? I think I missed something there.
Observations: (1) Very interesting, however, that the planets would be counted from the outermost planet—Pluto—inwards, which makes Earth the 7th planet. As Sitchin notes, how would Sumerians know of the outermost planets without a little . . . guidance, shall we say? (2) I note that 50 + 7 = 57 and 5 + 7 = 12 and 1 + 2 = 3 (Earth is the 3rd planet (not counting the moon—depending on its orbit) from the Sun. Not sure if Sitchin will mention that; just my own observations.
Would love to hear from you guys. Better yet, anyone want to join me in reading the book and discuss here?! I've got about 100 pages to go or so.
Love and light from the Midwest,
OH! . . . I just thought of the seven chakras! You know what that makes planet Earth counting from the outward in as Sitchin does?! The 7th planet; the seventh chakra; so close to the divine...Wow, this is starting to blow my mind...Also, a lovely idea of moving from the outward, in; from the macro to the micro; from that which circles to that which is circled--the center; from the higher self to the inner self...
Just lovely and so interesting!
Namaste from the Midwest, Friends.
P.S. I just thought of one of my two tattoos--a scene from Bergman's The Seventh Seal! Now I'm gonna have to re-watch that for meanings additional to why I first got the darn thing years ago while in grad school. And yes, the tattoo is of one of the concluding scenes where SEVEN characters are dancing in sillohette along the horizon.
|All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:10 AM.|
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.