All that Glitters is Not Gold

About 3.4 billion years ago cyanobacteria (blue-green bacteria) began to perform photosynthesis in the oceans of the earth. This first life upon the earth was directly dependent upon sunlight for its existence. To be in the light meant photosynthesis and life, to be in the dark meant no photosynthesis, no life. It wasn't until round 360 million years ago the first animals started to come out of the water to live upon land. Therefore life evolved for billions of years with a direct connection to the light as sustenance. About 250 million years prior to animals appearing on land, the first proto-eyes evolved in animals which were able to detect light and dark. Cnidarians were the first animals to be able to detect light. The seers were dependent upon these types of bacteria and other plant life to sustain them. Even for these animals, going toward the light and heat meant food and energy.
The shiny places meant refuge in the dark foreboding expanses of the sea. Could it be that at our deepest most primal cores we are still hard wired to think that shiny glittering things mean abundance, comfort, and life? 

   Hey, come  back. Come back here. I'm gonna get you. Gonna get you. . . Come here. . . I'm gonna swim with you. . . I'm gonna get you. I'm gonna get you. - Finding Nemo, 2003

And no one showed us to the land. 

And no one knows the where's or why's

But something stirs and something tries And starts to climb towards the light. Echos, Pink Floyd, 1971

Animals that do not preform photosynthesis are one step removed from the sun and can travel deep into the darkness of the ocean, never needing to travel to the surface. These are some of the meanest looking, craziest creatures on the planet who are obviously not concerned with beauty. They play dirty to get what they need to survive. They use other creatures natural attraction to the light to lure them in and eat them.

    Some deep sea Anglerfish lure in prey with a light emitting escae, the result of a symbiotic relationship with bioluminescent bacteria

The lure mimics something that the prey are drawn to naturally out of self preservation, but in a sadistic twist, that very thing turns out to be a trap and the cause of death rather than life. 

The word lure is originally from Anglo-French lure, Old French loirre "device used in falconry to recall a bird, lure". The lure mimics the natural prey of the falcon. Falcons probably aren't stupid. They learn that the lure is not prey, however it comes to be associated with something valuable, namely food and other benefits they may get from the relationship with their keeper. The user of the lure, in this case, does not mean to harm the falcon, but uses the birds natural attraction to its prey as an incentive for training.

    Pheasant Wing Lure, northwoodsfalconry.com

The etymological dictionary states that lure is from Frankish *lothr or some other Germanic source. It seems plausible that the Old French word loirre comes from root words like PIE *legh- "lie, lay" and *leugh- "to tell a lie", with the meaning of something like "lie, deceive, conceal, be false", considering that the 'g' might have been replaced by 'r' as in the name of the River Loire in France. The name Loire comes from Latin Liger, which is from the Gaulish name of the river Liga meaning "silt, sediment, deposit, alluvium", from root *legh- "lie, lay". False prey might be a bird that lies. It does not move it lays still. It is false, a lure. Which can make it like a trap. A lure lies, like a concealed hole in the ground lies, or, even, like soft wet silty earth near a river lies that it is solid ground when it is actually a muddy trap. All that appears solid is not solid and all that appears delicious and edible is not really edible.

The French word for gait of a horse is allure. The allure "gait; way of walking" of a thoroughbred may be a factor in people choosing a particular hose to bet on in a race such as the Kentucky derby, but it finally comes down to the race. You don't necessarily get paid by betting on looks. Although looks and talent are often seen together.

    Secretariat at Saratoga On The Grass Saddling Area, The Whitney Stakes, 1973

Appearances can be manipulated for effect. So we have the common saying that all that glitters is not gold. All that is shiny or alluring is not valuable. Gold is ultimately from PIE *ghel- (2) "to shine." Gold is shiny, but what about being shiny is good? It is pretty and that is part of the allure, however, its real value goes beyond its appearance. The gleam of gold does not fade it is durable, and gold is malleable, a good conductor, and it doesn't tarnish. So it is pretty, but it is also the promise of being something of value that is alluring. If something is alluring but it does not prove to be valuable or beneficial the allure is a trap. 

    Iron Pyrite- Fool's Gold

A beautiful or mysterious woman can be very alluring. Mermaids are the epitome of mysterious allurement. 

    The Depths of the Sea, Edward Burne-Jones, 1887

The sea itself is very alluring. It glitters and waves. In Latin mare / maris is "sea" and merus "pure; bare, naked," figuratively "true, real, genuine", probably originally "clear, bright," from PIE *mer- "to gleam, glimmer, sparkle." It is so delightful when it is peaceful. It is full of abundance, and enables swift travel. But it is a very raw and naked strength, and sometimes seemingly cruel and unforgiving, not unlike a mirror of merus (pure) truth. 

Things can be alluring that hold the promise of being delicious and delectable. In fact the word delicious comes from the sense of luring away. It is from Latin de "away"+ lacere "lure, deceive." Why would what is delicious be a deception? Perhaps it is a deception that what is delicious will make one happy, when in fact its deliciousness can lead one instead to a state of weakness, sickness or delicateness through [over]indulgence and therefore making one less resilient and finally less able to enjoy anything. What is delicious can lure us away from balance to our own demise.

Delicate meaning (of people)"self-indulgent, loving ease"; also "sensitive; easily hurt, feeble"; (of things) "delightful" is from Latin delicatus "alluring, delightful, dainty," also "addicted to pleasure, luxurious, efiminate" deliciae "a pet". Related to Latin delicere (de "away' + lacere "to lure, entice"). Often people have delicate lacy looking doilies to dress up holiday party tables. Fitting in that we are trapped by the delicacies and the word lace is from Latin lacium, from Latin laqueum "noose, snare," related to lacere.

Eat now. Feel guilty later. Hang over. . . tomorrow. Happy Thanksgiving. 

    Delicious Root Vegetables on Thanksgiving, photo by Julie O. /chthonickore

And I'm just going to leave it at that, 'cuz that's where I'm at right now.

peace ✌️

*The Problem With Language

    Egyptian Hieroglyphic Writing  [Hieroglyphs could be written to be read in columns vertically, or horizontally(mainly read right to left, but sometimes left to right)].

Written language was much more fluid and expansive in form and interpretation before modern alphabets were fully developed, such as with hieroglyphic writing. The representational pictures and symbols used early on began as pictures with inherent meaning and then evolved into the letters of the writing systems we have today. 

The symbols of writing systems evolve from pictograms / pictographs, i.e., pictures that resemble what they signify.

Pictograms of Fruit: watermelon = watermelon, lemon = lemon, etc. 

Simple pictograms may evolve into more complex ideograms, i.e., a symbol that is meant to stand for an idea of a thing, or a for things (but does not necessarily indicate how it is spoken). Pictograms or ideograms can be used to convey intentional meaning between people who speak different languages.

 

Ideogram [it is not a word]

Pictograms and ideograms can be used as logograms, i.e., (specifically a logogram is) a symbol that is meant to represent a word. Numerals are logograms, for example, when 1 is read as "one," or when the dollar sign  is read as "dollar(s)" it is a logogram. So $1 is read as "one dollar." However, if dollar signs are covering a page ($ $ $) we know that we are not meant to literally read it as, "dollars, dollars, dollars . . .," rather we are just supposed to get the idea of "a lot of money," so in that case the symbol is a different type of usage of an ideogram and not meant to be spoken 🤑. Therefore, sometimes the same symbols can be used in various ways, and we determine their intended meaning and value by context.

Hieroglyphs use ideograms(pictures/symbols) as logograms(words) and determinatives(not spoken but indicate context, clarify or emphasize adjacent words or phrases), as well as using ideograms which compose phonetic elements. Some symbols/glyphs are used to represent either a singular(unilateral), two letter(bilateral) or three letter(trilateral) combination of sounds, or word forming elements that are used to spell words. The same glyphs used phonetically are also often used at other times, to represent ideas or whole words.

Hieroglyphic Phonetic Glyphs

Written languages were originally much more complex in available meaning, or you might say, right brained, or yin, than they are now. Written language has evolved to accomplish quick precise communication, and ease of production in separate languages and different systems. This allows for a certain kind of efficient clarity in the passing of knowledge. However, at the same time, it confuses, and can even undermine a different kind of transference of knowledge having to do with origins, connectivity, and expansive themes.

Furthermore, there is the problem of transliteration and translation between languages. When  words are converted from a text from one alphabet or writing system to another in a different language, the words need to be transliterated, such as the names of a places like ׳רושלם "Jerusalem." The spelling of the word is attempted to be converted to a different alphabet or writing system(but the meaning of the word is not necessarily retained). And sometimes words are translated to a word with the same or similar meaning in the new language(the original meaning is attempted to be kept, but not the sound of the word in the original language). Two people who speak the same language may not even transliterate words into their own language the same way, especially if there is a type of sound spoken in the first language without an exact equivalent in the other. So one word can have several different spellings when transliterated into the new language, and then as a consequence varied pronunciations. Words are not always translated to the same exact word in a different language by two different translators either. 

For example in English we sometimes write either 'h' or 'ch' for the palital sound found in other languages, as in, the word Hanukka/Hanukkah/Chanukah/Chanukkah. There is not only one correct or agreed upon spelling in English, and proper pronunciation is often lost on English speakers who are not familiar with the origin of the word. Then what happens when a word gets transliterated or translated into yet another language, and become part of the vocabulary of a new language? And then maybe this process occurs yet again over long periods of time? We move from Hawwah/Chawwah/Havah/Havvah/Chavvah, meaning "life, life-giver," to the ancient Greek Εύα / Εύα (Epsilon, Upsilon, Alpha), transliterated to English Heua/Eua, but it looks more like "Eva" in appearance(especially with certain fonts, in the Greek script), simply meaning "the wife of Adam," [The Greek language also uses a different alphabet. It is similar enough to the Roman alphabet to cause abundant confusion to readers of English, see below]

Greek and English Alphabets(omega - small 'o' looks like a 'w', mi - small 'm' looks like a 'u', ni - the small 'n' looks like a 'v', gamma - the small 'g' looks like a 'y', ro - the 'r' looks like a 'p', etc.)

In English we get Eve from the Latin Eva, also taken from the Hebrew.  So we say Eve means "life," but it doesn't look or really even sound anything like the word Havvah/ Chawwah. 

 Hebrew to English(Notice Hebrew is read right to left, not left to right)

Notice further that Havah written in Hebrew looks(as shown above, חןה) nothing like its transliteration into English. It is different system altogether from English and the Latin alphabet. 

So in Greek and Latin(and therefore English) the name was transliterated, but not translated. If it had been translated to retain its meaning, we would be calling the woman in the garden of Eden Life or Lifegiver and the man would be called Man or Human(the humus-man "soil/earth"-man, or the man made out of the adamah "earth/ground").

And it can go on and on, "Eve/Havvah" can be put into another writing system like Chinese, and the writing system is entirely different again. The characters which form the name "Eve"[below] are pronounced as "Shya-wa" Xiàwá in Chinese and Adam is "Ya-dang" Yàdāng.

    Eve Written in Chinese

This is not to say that the left brained, yang, understanding of language is bad and we need to go back to symbolic language systems. But, rather both should be honored, and both utilized to gain complete knowledge. A marriage of the yin and yang(remember it is the union of the polarities, masculine/feminine, that creates "babies," that would be "new knowledge" in this case, and life is born through the yin/feminine). Language is not absolutely sterile or simple, black and white, even though it can be used in that manner(think, a mother, language, gives birth to both male/yang and female/yin children). In reality how language has developed and evolved over thousands of years of time is VERY complex.  It is like a game of telephone played on a COSMIC scale! What this points to is that any information you can get out of language is valid as information.

If something looks, sounds, or reminds you of another thing in any way, there is a reason for that similarity, it is a type of information that you have gathered. What is the reason? What is the connection? That is the question. Investigation is necessary. Not all connections are of equal weight, and not all connections bring about greater understanding, necessarily. Language can have meaning on multiple levels. So much of the story is blurred, buried and convoluted over thousands of years of time. It is a vast undulating sea, and it can be uncomfortable and disconcerting. We want to have solid ground below our feet. However, if people only did that we would have never made it to the "New World." What we really need is balance, and proper respect for what both the land, and the sea have to offer. It's safest to try and channel, or embrace your inner mermaid. Boats can sink . . .

     The Mermaid (detail), Howard Pyle (1853-1911) - photo of postcard