The Endowments Of A Myth
One of the most valuable tools we have in understanding cosmism, is the tool of "Comparative Mythology". Comparative mythology is the comparison of myths from different cultures in an attempt to identify shared themes and characteristics. Comparative mythology has served a variety of academic purposes. Mythology is usually associated with a fake story or a fairy tale. This gives it a negative connotation. As you shift your paradigm of myth to that of a positive one, you will see great value in the study and comparison of mythology.
Every myth is endowed by its author(s) 4 attributes. Recognizing these is what gives it it's value. They are as follows:
- The intended meaning: Each myth has an intended meaning, usually a spiritual principle attempting to be taught.
- A myth usually has a symbol or symbols associated with it.
- Every myth has one or more archetypes contained within it.
- And almost all myths are derived from either a close encounter with two or more planets to Earth, or an energized plasma discharge in Earths skies, or both. The archetype and the symbolism are both derived by the actions and/or position of these heavenly displays.
Example: Ancient paradise stories
- The intended meaning: It symbolizes idyllic conditions on earth and a terrestrial (vice telestial) state.
- Symbol: The Garden of Eden (Hebrew localized interpretation).
- Archetype: The archetypal sacred city, or land.
- Cosmic display: The Conjunction of planets with four streamers stretching from Venus to Saturn with Mars centered [insert image here]
Our ancient ancestors wrote in a very different style than we do today. Every story had to be written with a spiritual meaning, teaching some kind of principle. Their writing was filled with symbolism and imagery that is very foreign to us today. They didn't just write in a different language, but a foreign language inside of a foreign language. A style of writing that can only be understood by understanding symbolism, imagery, archetypes, and motifs. Egyptian hieroglyphs are one example. There is also a big difference in writing styles from the "western world" to the "eastern world".
A paradigm shift from our modern western style of reading, writing, and story telling to an ancient, and eastern style must take place in order to understand ancient texts.
Given the dialogic nature of language and how we use it to form narratives that inform us, Frank’s basic premises are these:
1. Stories do not belong to storytellers and story listeners because all stories are “reassemblies of fragments on loan” and “depend on shared narrative sources.”5
2. Stories not only contribute to the making of our narrative selves but also weave the threads of social relationships and make life social.
3. Stories have certain distinct capacities that enable them to do what they do best and can be understood as narrative types or genres. Though distinct, genres of stories depend on one another, for there is no such thing as a pure genre, and all tale types have a symbiotic relationship to one another.
4. Socio-narratology encourages a dialogic mode of interpretation so that all voices can be heard, and open up a story for various interpretations and possible uses.
5. “Socio-narratology, although always relational in recognizing that all parties act, pays most attention to stories acting. It analyzes how stories breathe as they animate, assemble, entertain, and enlighten, and also deceive and divide people.”6
6. Analysis demands that we learn from storytellers. “The primary lesson from storytellers is that they learn to work with stories that are not theirs but there, as realities. Master storytellers know that stories breathe.”7