Mauro Biglino - Cannibalismo Sacro 09-10-2023
Episode Summary:
The document discusses the historical and theological nuances of the mass, particularly focusing on the concept of transubstantiation and its interpretations. The term "mass" has its origins in the Latin language, with interpretations varying from it referring to those sent on a mission, to the host (the consecrated bread) being sent. The term "host" is highlighted to mean victim, implying the delivery of a victim during the mass. The document deeply engages with the theological debates around the substance of the host, detailing arguments on transubstantiation, transfinalization, and trans signification, among others.
The author, Mauro Biglino, then navigates through the historical and linguistic journey of the term "Moloch" or "Molech," traditionally associated with a deity to whom child sacrifices were made. However, the document elaborates on the interpretation that "Molech" might not refer to a deity but to a type of sacrifice, the "molek" or "holocaust" in Phoenician, meaning a complete burning of the victim. The Hebrew language and its verb forms are explored to understand the term "Molech" better, suggesting that it refers more to the act of sacrifice itself rather than a specific god.
The document critiques the parallel between ancient sacrificial practices and the Christian mass, positing that the idea of consuming the flesh of Christ during the Eucharist is a form of sacred cannibalism similar to ancient rites. It mentions the psychological and communal aspects of mass gatherings, suggesting that the mass might also serve to create a shared sensation among the participants, likening it to a form of theophagy or sacred cannibalism.
Throughout the document, there is an emphasis on the need to understand these religious practices within their historical and linguistic contexts, urging a re-evaluation of traditional interpretations and beliefs. The document concludes by questioning the spiritual representation of the mass in light of its historical and anthropological origins, hinting at a need for a broader understanding of sacred texts and rituals.
Key Takeaways:
- The term "mass" and "host" have deep historical and linguistic roots, with implications for understanding Christian liturgy.
- "Moloch" is traditionally associated with child sacrifice but may refer to the sacrificial act itself, not a deity.
- Debates around the substance of the Eucharist (transubstantiation, transfinalization, etc.) reflect diverse theological interpretations.
- Parallels are drawn between ancient sacrificial rites and Christian mass, suggesting a form of sacred cannibalism.
- Understanding these religious practices requires a re-evaluation within their historical and linguistic contexts.
Mauro Biglino - Cannibalismo Sacro 09-10-2023
Good morning.
So, go, mass is over.
Ite missa est. Let's say that this statement is obviously one that we all know and which concludes the rite of the liturgy of human sacrifices.
Well, maybe things aren't like this, they wouldn't be like this.
of the mass in Latin, something that Benedict XVI, so to speak, more widely granted and this is added, within the same interpretation of the mass, the discussion relating to communion, that is, what happens to the host.
We know that we are talking about transubstantiation, that is, the Church says that the substance of the bread truly becomes the substance of flesh, that is, it truly becomes the flesh of Jesus Christ.
There are other theological interpretations which they have been discussing for years, for several years, even if this obviously takes place not for the benefit of the public but within, so to speak, the experts and we talk about transfinalization, that is, we say that in the moment to the human sacrifices already present in the Bible". The term mass which derives from Latin has had different interpretations, different interpretations, according to some it derives from missi which means those who were sent, it could indicate the fact that the catechumens who originally participated at that rite, when it was time for the sacrifice, they were sent away because they could not assist, or missi could have been those who were sent on a mission, let's say on an apostolic mission, or missa was the host, that is, the fact that the host, therefore the bread, the consecrated bread, had been sent, that is, it had been brought to be delivered to those who had not had the opportunity to participate in the common rite and therefore consumed the consecrated bread elsewhere.
However, I already remember an important fact because then we need it to understand afterwards that host means victim of therefore what is delivered is the victim.
Speaking of victim we all have in mind the term Molok which would indicate a divinity to whom, in a particular way, they were offered another provision of Benedict XVI annulled it by prohibiting the celebration in Biblical Hebrew. I will try to do it in the most concise way possible, so that it is clear why, I repeat, it is then functional to the next part which is the really interesting part. So now let's go and see. So now let's see how verbs are treated in Hebrew precisely to represent, And now we see how this mass, that is, the modern mass, is closely linked others speak of trans signification, that is, a change in meaning of what is then consumed by the faithful, still others say that trans finalization, trans signification are within trans substantiation. We know that Luther spoke of consubstantiation, Calvin still had a different vision so in reality, as I said before, the divisions
within the Church are really many also in relation to the interpretation of the culminating event, because the culminating event is the sacrifice of Jesus Christ who is renewed, shared with the faithful who then must also consume his flesh.
because in fact, as all the statistics now say, the Churches are emptying and if they are emptying it is not due to external attacks, that is, it is not the fault of those who, so to speak, criticize the Church from the outside. The Churches are emptying because the Roman Church is imploding due to problems within it and Francis' motu proprio, Traditionis Custodes, has effectively canceled Sunday, we know it means go because mass is over. It would also be easy to make a joke in the sense that I'm thinking of that Venetian parish in which the parish priest has posted a sign saying mass suspended due to lack of faithful.
Now we are going to read a very authoritative source. However, in order to fully understand the possible true meaning of Moloch which then refers us to the modern mass, it is necessary, I ask permission to do so, for me to give you two very brief indications on the way in which verbs are handled in the Hebrew language, in the way in which verbs indicating actions were constructed of the consecration actually changes the purpose of the host, it does not change the substance.
as I was saying, the intentionality of the action, the aspect of the action. verb that we are examining in relation to the mass, so that we do not forget, we are talking about Molok, even better in Phoenician Molk and in Hebrew now we find Molech and so here so, let's say, we close the circle. Semitic at the Sapienza University of Rome, has dedicated studies to this aspect and to this term and tells us a whole series of interesting things.
Now, obviously I will spare you all the philological analysis because it is really, in short, for super enthusiasts, but let's come to the conclusions which are the ones that interest us for the connection with the Mass. So, in the meantime he tells us that the Hebrew molech that we are now going to read, i.e. the Phoenician molech, was transposed by the Greeks, transliterated by the Greeks as molok and therefore became the divinity that we know.
But he says we can affirm that molek presents in Hebrew the Phoenician meaning of holocaust, that is, it does not indicate a divinity. qatal form is killing in its simplest aspect.but it indicates the sacrificial act, that sacrificial act which consisted in completely burning the victim to transform it into smoke which then went upwards and not for symbolic reasons, we have already seen it several times but because that smoke was particularly liked to the Elohim that, as written several times in chapter 28 of the book of numbers, that smoke calmed them, in particular it is Yahweh who says it, that is, the biblical Elohim. Professor Carbini cites in particular Jeremiah 32-35 and the second book of Ages.
Now let's go and see them so we can better understand his reasoning which leads us to have another meaning of Moloche and to link it to our current mass.
In Jeremiah 32-35 It is said that they built the Then there is the octal form, which is the passive of this, that is, he was killed. And then there is the last form, the seventh, which is it cattel, which is the form, let's say, intensive reflexive, he is killed with particular violence, therefore he committed suicide in a particularly gruesome way. Here, don't worry, it's not that you have to remember these things here, you'll see that now everything becomes clear, what interests us is this, that is, this shape here, the a stone falls on him, this stone hits a passerby and kills him, so here's the thing But things may not be that way.
Professor Garbini, professor of philology violence, killed vehemently, massacred, slaughtered. Then there is the Kuttal form, which is the passive of this, he was killed with, he was killed with vehemence. Then there is the Iktil form, which is said, is called the active causative form, that is, he caused to be killed, therefore causative. that is, he was killed. Then there is the third form, which is called Kittel, which is the intensive form and which here already represents intentionality. that is, killed with The first verbal form is called qatal and conventionally the paradigm is always rendered with the third person
singular of the perfect tense therefore it means killed, killed in the simple form i.e. without intentionality, therefore
a person is working in ancient Israel on the construction of his house, he is found on top, We sometimes use paraphrases etc., however in Hebrew there are changes in the roots.
So, to give an example, let's use the verb kill, it is also often used in grammars, among other things perhaps not by chance because killing is a particularly widespread verb in the Bible. let's not forget, however, that we are talking and we are clarifying, trying to clarify, the discussion relating to Moloch and therefore now we see these verbal forms.
As regards, I repeat as an example, let's choose the verb kill. Now let's see what a very authoritative source says about this. Molok is precisely the, as he is known, as the God to whom human sacrifices were offered, in particular children and therefore there was this God Molok.
Then there is the The second form in which it occurs is the Niktal, which is the passive of heights of Baal in the valley of Ben Inom, and this Baal was Baal Amon, to pass their sons and their daughters through the fire in honor of Moloch." active causative form. This means that Molech originally designated exclusively the Molch or rather the Phoenician Moloch and the passage of the name from a sacrificial term, that is from a term that simply indicated the sacrifice, the passage of the name from a sacrificial term to a divine name was made subsequently".
So in in reality here we are talking about sacrifices made to the various Baals, including obviously Yahweh who certainly did not do without them. and in another of his works Professor Garbini explains this correlation says, corresponds exactly to the Phoenician form Moloch which is the participle in the the Greeks did. the molk sacrifice of Phoenician origin. Here is where the term Moloch appears in the Bible, in the translated Bible and perhaps in the translated Bible, let's say with the conditioning of that transliteration which which we are talking about between Moloch and the Christian mass.
The conception of Christian sacrifice and especially its manifestation in the liturgy of the Catholic mass reveal profound and precise structural affinities with king where it is said that they made their sons and daughters pass ba esh lam molek, it is written and here the term molek appears, not the term molok which instead appears in translations and which appears in the
Greek Bible Phoenician molk, which is the passive participle, this form here of the verb ala' which means to send upwards,
to send, and obviously through the sacrifices they sent upwards this smoke which the Elohim really liked, which the divinities of I would say generally on planet Earth.
Let us first of all remember the sacrifice, that massacre that Noah commits when he returns to dry land and actually amasses dozens of animals taken from who knows where, look, certainly not from the ark, he burns them and therefore to create a large column of smoke, a molek, a sacrifice through which one sends one upward The same Latin term missa which, he says, refers to ostia and I remember that ostia in Latin means victim, is simply the simple translation of the word The same thing is said in the second book of kings, in chapter 23 in verse 10, where it is said that Josiah, the king of Judah, made Tophet, that is, that sacred place, which was in the valley of Ben-in-Nom, impure.
Made pure in the sense of his own, he also had it destroyed, so that no one would let their son or daughter pass through the fire in honor of Moloch". But what is actually written in the Hebrew Bible? Let's read directly , since the two passages are the same, we read only one, we read the one from the second book of made precisely from these passages that we have just read, tells us that the explicit mention of the deity Baal makes the interpretation of Molech as the name of the sacrifice, not the name of a deity, safe. And then he tells us yet another interesting thing which, in confirmation of this, we have precisely the testimony of the Greek version, that is, the one which reports Moloch instead and says that it corresponds exactly to the Phoenician form Moloch which is a participle in the passive causative form, which is why I have explained all these things, so in the causative form passive of that verb, so in reality it is not the name of a divinity but it is the participle, in this particular form, of a verb and therefore indicates the name of the sacrifice. which perhaps influenced the translations and contributed to creating this idea of the existence of this divinity called Molò when in reality the divinity for whom in this case they had their children burned, for whom they had their children burned was Baal Amon or, as Yahweh himself says in another passage of the Bible, it was Yahweh who burned them when, he himself says, and I gave them orders for which they could
not live when I forced them to pass their firstborn through the fire.
Professor Garbini, in his examination the victim. Let us think of the same Sumero-Akkadian Noah who does the same thing and who, the Sumero-Akkadian texts tell us, once this hecatomb is burning the and so on. I talked about it in the books where I made parallels between the Bible and the Greek texts, it is talked about in the texts of the Far East, Strabo talks about it with regards to the Celts, the stories relating to the Central and South American civilizations talk about it, so in reality this was very widespread but the interesting thing is We must understand, we must honestly accept and admit that it is exactly the same thing, it is sacred cannibalism and there is something that is sent.
Now, many interpretations are possible regarding this something that is sent, I said before which ones related to those who were sent sent out at the moment in which the sacrifice was celebrated etc. however, you know, it is also said that when there is an assembly of many people it creates something that is sent and this is one of the interpretations that is added to the others .
I represent it to you as it is described but I am also sure that many of you have tried it, so much so that, for example, it is said that one thing is... let's leave religion for a moment... watching a sporting event or I don't know, listen to a singer on television. Another thing, from the point of view of perhaps all these assemblies within which these rites were celebrated also served and can also serve to create something else that is sent and that is used and it is not a question of magic, it is a question of something what Professor Garbini does, this direct relationship this is the mass, that is, the sending of the host, therefore it is clear that if this host, this victim, as the Church says through the doctrine of transubstantiation, is truly the flesh of God , here we are talking, without any shadow of a doubt, about theophagy, that is, about believers who eat their God or, if you prefer, about sacred cannibalism". sensations, emotions, what you feel, but what you feel almost on a physical level, it means actively participating, that is, being present in that rite, be it a sporting rite or a singing rite, because something is created there , that is, you experience different sensations. of physique.
I myself experienced it in the ten years of conferences when I always traveled alone and often drove for many hours, for example when I gave conferences in central Italy, Umbria rather than Marche, and therefore perhaps I drove alone for 6-7 hours, 8 hours and I arrived an hour or two before the conference, I often arrived even a little tired let's say, but as soon as I started meeting people, especially when I entered the room and gave the conference there was something not magical, but a something that almost physically charged me, so much so that I was able to go on talking for hours and hours and hours". Well, perhaps this is the meaning of the assemblies that are created and that were created for these rites, they also had precisely this aspect.
And perhaps this is also the aspect that has been lost, the reason why people no longer, in quotes, feel the Mass, because perhaps these sensations are no longer created. And this is perhaps also the reason why the traditionalists would still like the Latin Mass, the one that I said at the beginning the Pontiff prohibited, because in the Latin Mass they perhaps seemed to sense something that in the Mass celebrated, in the language understandable to all, perhaps is not created more.
Now, anthropologists describe to us these forms of rite, theophagy or sacred cannibalism among different populations, let's say so-called primitive, located in various parts of planet Earth and when we read about these stories Well, I can't tell you exactly whether things are really like this but the suggestion is very strong. the fact remains, the fact remains that, if what the Church says is true, here we are faced with exactly as in ancient civilizations, exactly as in the stories of populations scattered across various parts of the earth, we are faced with a rite in which the faithful physically eat the flesh of their God. Anunna or Anunnaki come attracted by the smoke as flies are attracted by the flesh we tend to look with a bit of disdain and instead we tend to represent in a spiritual way, in a higher way, what happens within the liturgy of the Mass.
Bye, thanks, see you next time.