Reading Ahmed Osman's
OUT OF EGYPT

In this series you can also find
Pages about the Historical Characters : Akhnaton, Moses, Oedipus, Triple Hermes,
Pages about the discoverers : Freud, Lacan, Velikovsky I & II, Osman I & II, Theaux.

WARNING: Many links temporarily disabled

Short explanatory Sub-Title :
" Immateriality of Jesus and Oedipus ? "

FOREWORDS

In this review of OUT OF EGYPT  , I shall follow its process of deduction, without criticising the historical data upon which it is based. I do this as a Psychoanalyst who reads a report which stands by itself, aside from its realism (since it is through a revisited irrealism that a genuine source of objectivity can be retrieved - and can open to options beside dead-ends or blockages that classical realism encounters - ref#1 - ). For instance, Ahmed Osman's discourse relies on datings of the Gospels which may be controversial, and other interpretations which may not be taken literally, but more so, for their meaning. This is a secondary process that Science must come to include in its system, in order to address the quality of consciousness which escorts it.

Zenon Kelper's Reading of
Ahmed Osman's OUT OF EGYPT

Ahmed Osman's 4th book - OUT OF EGYPT - opens the question of " what is an absence? ". In this case, the absence is that of the historicity of a classical Jesus living from 1.AD to 30.AD. Ahmed Osman identifies a 'spiritual entity ' during this dating, and reports its true historical being living at a much earlier time (e.g. by Moses' epoch, 1400-1000.BC). This question of historicity is especially interesting in our present times - I'd like to refer to it in terms of corporality; for I believe that it is useful to customize our actual ontology along with the domain of Genetics. A genome is a practical identification for a so-called historical being. In fact, the notion of Code in the 20th century AD, will be helpful for clarifying certain previously confused references as to the name, the body, the soul, the ego, the representant, etc...

A good example is given precisely in Moses' times. At that period, the legend/deeds of a certain Oedipus took place in Greece (Oedipus transmitted his initiation to Theseus, the founder of Athens). For centuries, scholars claimed that people who thought that Oedipus had existed were infantile or idiots. Yet, certain people now realize that there is a striking similarity between the Oedipus' character and the historical figure of Akhnaton [X8velX]. The ancient question of the historicity of Oedipus can be translated today into the question how Akhnaton's genome has interacted with the Aegean ecosystem.

In order to approach the modern identification of a person, we can begin with the prologue of OUT OF EGYPT. It is my opinion that the absence or presence of corporality in the case of Oedipus is comparable with the absence or presence of corporality in the case of Jesus. Greek civilization is an historical fact, yet we don't have any archeological evidence of Oedipus - Christianity is also an historical fact, and likewise we have no substantial archeological evidence of Jesus life (1st AD). Since Ahmed Osman's book is a study of Jesus as a case of an absence and which he relates to Akhnaton's time and events, it is remarkable that any reference to Oedipus is also absent from his study. In the very detailed case that we are examining, Ahmed Osman stands for an Akhnaton-Moses individuality and link this 'AkhMos' corporality and family with the question of absence/presence of Jesus. Meanwhile, he maintains an absolute silence about the very same configuration, namely an identified 'AkhMos' with the absence/presence of Oedipus. It is especially remarkable, for Ahmed Osman is very well aware of the Oedipus question following 'Akh-Mos' . We can subsume that Ahmed Osman deliberately excluded from his own view a component (the corporality of Akhnaton under the name of Oedipus), and that he will then after displace and examine an 'absence' (the alibi of Jesus Christ).
In doing so, Ahmed Osman shows the great merit to possibly reflect and imitate - hence bringing forth for an analysis - what Civilization may do.

The Prologue of OUT OF EGYPT adds even more indications about the approach of an absence: it is a good example of the subtle oddity in the Psyke (Psyche) - that makes it appearing as a Sphinx - showing how Truth veils itself . "In being said, Truth underlines its absence," this aphorism finds its expression when Ahmed Osman opens his book. He makes a reference to Alexandria, the Ptolemean Egypt, and other references to Hermes-Thoth-Trismegistus which has been a crucial figure of Christianity . Ptolemees and Hermesses are both from Greece, thus one would take this into account as the Greek component in Osman's History of Christianity. Yet, he actually takes from this material in making the following assessment : "thanks to modern archeologists, a new age now appears on the horizon, with Egypt restored to its original place" ; for "I shall show how Egypt emerges as the birthplace of our spiritual teachers..." He thereby relies on the excuse of his Alexandrian introduction for subtracting the archeological place of the worship of the Ptolemean Hermes Thoth on the location of Amarna (aka Akhtaton, Akhnaton's city). Since he identifies Amarna as the birth place of Christianity, the absence of its reference and its re-construction as Hermopolis, is again an oddity which makes Ahmed Osman's text so interesting.

Following the Prologue, the Introduction of OUT OF EGYPT makes this subtle point clearer when it brings forth theological aspects.

During the early days of space travel, journalists have made notice that a man was not finding evidence of God in outerspace. Although Space in itself may actually be sufficient evidence of God for a simple mind, it is also true that one can be surprised with the scientific data from outertime, recently brought forth with The Dead Sea Scrolls and The Nag Hammadi library. These set of documents are both contemporary with Christianity's birth. They also come from the same area, and though they focus on religion, they bear no mention of Jesus Christ. Such situation has always been depressing for Historians; if Jesus Christ has ever existed how he would ridiculize the noble Academia? On the other hand, the fact is that, if archeology - in the current state of mentality of science - discovers an historical evidence of Jesus Christ, it will probably be used as a strong argument against a real Christianity.
If we consider the meaning of this religion, it carries the faith in a human/god who did not leave any traces. It is a traditional appreciation of an harmonic expression of an existence. A Christian would expected that an historian would search for historical evidences of Jesus presence, and that he would find nothing. In the 20th century, this possible paradox does not contradict the scientific mind, since the most advanced scientific psychology has established precisely the reason for such blind-spots, for they are 'necessities' for its actual state of consciousness (ref#2).

In other words, Ahmed Osman probably knows that a book which is limited on verifiable data cannot be a book of truth . Therefore, when he writes in his introduction "the purpose of this book is to try, by an objective approach based on verifiable data..," he necessarily imposes upon himself a symptom - that appears in the form of repression of the once secret Aegean data which is so relevant to the matter he explores . It is precious material for an analysis that is now ready to start from its first chapter/session.

OUT OF EGYPT's First Chapter assumes that a pharaoh originated a male lineage through Abraham's wife (indeed the Biblically suggested origin of Isaac). Thus Isaac and his descendants may be identified as Egyptians. For contemporary scientists, this is an intellectual duty which is imposed by the fact that the 18th Pharaonic Dynasty shows a series of characters who match the important record of the Bible.

A freudian model may help in understanding and supporting the position that Ahmed Osman assumes in his Second Chapter. When a paternity is repressed or denied, a certain mechanism (theorically related related to the language and anatomy of sex ) imposes a spiritualization, or a repetition, that will re-enact the suppressed gene bearer. This model matches Ahmed Osman's view : since a necessary 'actor' would follow the 'author' that Isaac's father is, an since the exploits Biblical King David superimpose with the historical deeds of the Pharaoh TuthMoses.3, this mechanism of repetition can be evoked. A 'Minor Tribal King' is indeed known by historians, and his endorsement with the accomplishments of a 'Major Warrior King' reasonably supports the probability that a hidden father of Isaac was TuthMoses. Yet, authorizing Ahmed Osman to identify TuthMoses as the 'real' David, is another step (for an actor of a repetition from the Unconscious may not be exempt of existence - and this is where we have to call for the science of representation that is called Linguistics (later 'Cybernetics').

It is still a Freudian model to be completed with the Third Chapter of OUT OF EGYPT. It displays the two necessities for the structure of a dream : as names are displaced, they always combine with a collateral move of topological places. This is what Ahmed Osman successfully finds in his Egyptological reading of the Bible. Moreover, in a dream, such imaginary representation of the symbolic process of displacement must be charged with the repressed itself - and Ahmed Osman actually eludes the definite closure of the 18th Dynasty which took place with the foundation of peace by Ramses.2 at Quades . With this omission, representing the desire of the repressed father, the structure of a dream is complete - it slides two places (Jerusalem / 'foundation of peace' / Quades), representing the displacement of the father's name .

Pic.10: shows the move of a Significand/Name,
first occulted (signified) then displaced as for example Quades,
at the beginning of the 18th Dynasty endeavor and
at its clusure with Ramses; this is shown in
the formula of the Naming of the Father

The second part of OUT OF EGYPT (beginning Chapter Twelve) lays on the strong foundation of the previous chapters, which has harmonized Egyptology and Bible. As it is obvious that "if there has been an Akhnaton/Amarna experience of Monotheism in Egypt in 1350 BC, it cannot be not mentioned in the Bible (otherwise, the historicity of the Bible should be seriously questioned)", the end of Amarna and especially of the children of Akhnaton, must likewise be found in the Bible. This necessity may be well considered with the help of a comparison.
Let's imagine a History of the Foundation of the Americas that did not mention the European Renaissance or its Revolutions. We would then have to consider a serious condition such as paranoia or schizophrenia in the resulting civilization of the New World. However, it would be understandable that such an History of the Americas would not clearly mention these founding European events if they were repressed in Europe itself - their revelation might be the cause for a war due to the attempt to eliminate the repression in Europe. If the Sacred Scriptures of Israel were in this situation (with the TuthMoses Renaissance, the Akhnaton Revolution and the Ramsessides Repression), then they are mentioning the 18th Dynasty as precisely as their very minutes. Yet they do it in a coded way and Ahmed Osman's idea that they may even re-enact certain special phases of this Dynasty is definitely interesting.

Ahmed Osman is therefore asking : How and where is the last King (Tut) of the 18th Dynasty mentioned ? And quite logically, his 'dream' will precipitate at the end of the Old Testament where the (a)-story  of Jesus Christ indeed appeals for identifications.

Before enumerating the chapter series of this part of OUT OF EGYPT, an important remark must be made :

NOTE : How far and how limited is the ' OUT ' , out of Egypt ? If Tut must be mentioned somewhere 'out of Egypt', we must scan extensively this 'out of Egypt' space - for the more mention (symbolization) would be found of him, the less of an hallucinatory construct would be made as an outcome of his 'repetition'. As we said earlier, Ahmed Osman is blatantly blinding himself with the deprivation from the Hellenic material. Especially with Oedipus, for instance; the story of Akhnaton's children may be described in great detail, in Sophocles' Oedipus at Colonus and Antigone (ref#1 ). Therefore - if the hypothesis is correct that the story of Oedipus is remarkably similar to that of Akhnaton - then it would mean that the Eastern Mediterraneans always kept an intense and precise memory of the last kings of the 18ht Dynasty; and thus reducing considerably the hypothesis of a need for an hallucinatory acting-out of the Egyptian repression of Atonism during a Christian Era. This remark being said, let us resume the reading of Ahmed Osman's book.

After the source of a dream (Chap.1-3), then the realism of a dream (Chap 4-11), the second Part of OUT OF EGYPT is similar with the unfolding of a dream which bears the typical weirdness of dreams, and which culminate before awakening.

The 'uncanny' (of an ending dream) begins with the Christians unreliability regarding any historical evidence of their Patron (Chap.12) - and which is worsened by the only evidence of false accounts and forgeries. In compensation (Chap. 13), the only viable post-Christian reference for Jesus is found in the Talmud. but this Hebrew Scripture does not give any clue for a dating of 'Yeshu'. Moreover the two archeological findings in the 20th Century, the Dead Sea Scrolls (Essenesses/Teacher of Righteousness) and the Nag Hammadi Library (Gnostics and Therapeutae), which provides documents written around 1.AD, make no historical mention either of a contemporary Jesus, but of an earlier figure, which seems to bring Christianity back to an earlier time. This is reasonably allowing Ahmed Osman to associate in this reference, the Suffering Servant mentioned by Isaiah (approx 700BC) and then by Josuah   . This is the point where the weirdness of dreams begins to infiltrate Ahmed Osman's text.

Yet I must make another remark.

NOTE : How irrelevant is a predicted absence ? 1) About the 'no-mention' of an historical being, despite reports of him in an earlier time, Ahmed Osman would be more complete by reminding the reader that by the Fourth Century AD, a Pessah Hagadah (Chronicle of the Exodus ) had not given any mention of Moses. Thus, if we admit nevertheless an historicity for Moses, in order to conclude that someone did not exist, it is not sufficient to notice that he was hardly mentioned. A human being 'of the Present' can easily be omitted in academical records or mentioned in foot-note or in the midst of errors . Jesus had no Internet access, and I myself show, being much less a cause for subjectivity than the founding vacuity of a religion, that, if my Akhnaton-Moses-Oedipus is correct, this piece of truth (Akh=Mos=Oed) that everyone is searching for, is mentioned nowhere with acknowledgement of me, not even by Ahmed Osman, with whom I conferred with flesh (as in Paul's word ) . An absence from institutional records is something so common for a minor truth that it is certainly appropriate in the case of Jesus Christ who was in representation of the plural People and the whole Truth. 2) Beside its logical Absence in Presencia, the matter of an anteriority to Jesus Christ is equally important. That a person existed according to a certain background is something well admitted. Moreover, during the European Renaissance, the Corpus Hermeticum was basing Christianity upon such fact that it had been predicted, or announced, in an earlier antiquity . This argument that Ahmed Osman uses as discrediting the historicity of Jesus Christ, was considered as a proof of the very same thing. I have made an extended analysis of this debate, which shows that the quality of either nullification or proof in this interpretation depends on the availability of the Hellenic data . There again we see the consequences of Ahmed Osman's repression of the Akhnaton-Moses-Oedipian compound that he knows well. One shall not be surprised therefore, to find Christian rituals and symbols in Ancient Egypt, as we find Islamic rituals in earlier Christianity etc... On the contrary, the repression of the background condition (Narcissism opposing the principle of Plurality) eventually attracts the precipitation of the dream..:

Tracking back Jesus Christ along his anteriority, Ahmed Osman touches the Egyptological ground with Tutankhamon (Chap.14). This is also the moment his text becomes singularly efflorescent. a) For the first time, he speaks about himself - not in negative but about the staring revelation he felt in November 1997 during a private visit in Tut's tomb ("finally establishing as orthodox belief..the Christian Trinity"). Also b) he refers there to Sigmund Freud whose grandiose theory (murder of the father) he absolutely reverses (into a murder of the son ). He also mentions that c) he concluded in 1992 that the mummy of Tutankhamon shows signs of wounds when 'no one seemed to agree' - while many scholars have come recently to accept this view.
In this culminating experience, which completes a dream before awakening, Ahmed Osman introduces d) his reading of the Transfiguration Scene (where Jesus Christ meets Moses unveiled in front of three of his disciples) which he indicates as being the only clue in the gospels to the era in which Jesus lived. Actually, instead of making the Christ a contemporary of Moses, the dreamy argument is exquisite as it may be an 'only clue'... indeed leading to the identification of Jesus after the Ptolemean Empire. Their approbation for the acknowledgement of the Alexandrian description of Moses (given by the Egyptian priests to the Roman historians ) as an Egyptian pharaoh was necessarily asked of the Rabbis, by a founder of the Christian ecumenism. We know nowadays how the description of this pharaoh, superimposes well with Akhnaton - but at that time, it could easily be ignored and refused. So it happened during Jesus' meeting with the Rabbis in Jerusalem . The Gospels explain that this refusal was the cause of the Transfiguration Scene, where Jesus reveals the political decision for maintaining the Ancient Alliance, which implied that the identity of Moses would be veiled. This debate could have taken place only at a precise time: after the Ptolemean and before the Christian Roman Empire .
In this passage, Ahmed Osman presents Jesus with all the attributes of Tuthankamon (wife, mother, father, name, folk, ritual, crown, neighbors) - like a dream would represent : "my wife (or my husband) in the outfits of my mother (or my father) (Re: below)" This final structure of a dream includes a breaking point then, with a unsustainable contradiction, when modifying two of the most fundamental descriptions of the Old Testament. The fantastic figure of Tut as a Saint, murdered in the Sinai when he made his way there on an ecumenical mission to..persuade his father and..preach peace and tolerance, imposes that the delivery of the Tables of the Law, and Moses's sojourns on the Sinai should be displaced, before the Exodus. Ahmed Osman thus affirms that the Old Testament is garbled on this point (although he relies confidently on it at other occasions).
As a matter of fact, a distortion reaches a point where, where with the hinge Chapter title EXODUS, the dream breaks up into awakening... and follows a treatise on Silence which ends the second part of OUT OF EGYPT.

This Chapter 17 - titled CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE - exposes Ahmed Osman's overview of the Hebrew memorization and its technique, from the time of Moses until the beginning of Christianity. Precisely, he covers the tradition from the entry into Canaan until the beginning of Christianity - thus leaving a certain gap, between Moses and Canaan, kept in silence.
I don't mean that Ahmed Osman keeps this silence for the conspiracy that he denounces, yet he explains how after Moses (1350BC) and from 1150BC on, the Hebrew editors have written a previous oral memory and probably modified it several times. This approach debases the very fact that Moses' delivery was already a Knowledge of Writing (a Scripture which has sometimes been identified as the Secret Egyptian Hieroglyph , a notion that, in fact, Ahmed Osman, for some reason, underestimates). Moreover, there are crucial data in the crack between 1350-1150BC. In this historic window which encompasses the disappearance of Akhnaton-Moses and the first Jewish settlements in Canaan, what took place was the major restoration and organization of the Egyptian Empire and all this Eurasian-African Isthmus.

Gradually, our modern mentality with its realism can figure out Atonism , according to political goals rather than romantic or mystical patterns. As the formation of one single entity, all over the 'World' of this time, Amenophis.3 (of from Tuthmoses.3 to Amarna)'s project had failed with Akhnaton's difficulties and Tutankhaton's fall in Thebes. This political plan was resumed and undertaken by Ramses.2, who also re-wrote the internal History of Egypt, following the deletion of the Amarnian episode by Horemheb. Not only was Ramses.2 able to fill up the blank periods that resulted form this censorship, but he succeeded in imposing the same cover up upon his principal neighbors (Hittites) - who deleted all of their relationship with the Amarnian Kings, from their historical records. There is little doubt that Ramses.2 attempted with all his might, to generate the same censorship and cover up amongst the tribes who had been directly influenced by Akhnaton. After Horemheb, who made it a crime, punishable by death, to even mention the name of Akhnaton, Ramses.2 certainly suggested to the Hebrews, in exchange of their silence, a counterpart in terms of security, and perhaps Land (this was promising for the two parties: security for the wandering tribes and control for Egypt).
The international deeds of Ramses.2 are so well known that it is remarkable that Ahmed Osman never mentions them. These events occurred around 1250BC, at the termination of the 18th Dynasty project, when Ramses.2 wraped up and repressed the Atonian politics, in the middle of the gap about which Ahmed Osman keeps silent, and especially at Quades , the very place and name that he scrutinized for other reasons and in regards to different times, at the beginning of the 18th Dynasty episode (Re: above 'third Chapter/structure of a dream').
There is even also another 'Kadesh' which took place at this time - an Hebrew Kadesh, reported in the Bible, that never mentions Ramses' international negotiation of Quades . It is where/when the tribes of Israel met and disputed in order to agree on their past agenda - thus indicating that they may have submitted to the Ramses frame, and 'editing,' before entering and enjoying the promise of Canaan.

Ahmed Osman's denunciation of a 'Conspiracy of Silence' does not deny it ! - since his own silence would cover it up (this Logic of Truth - double absence - that it is so urgent to teach to Artificial Intelligence - in its detailed and formulated humanism by Psychoanalysis ). He thus builds up a linguistic complex which corroborates the structure of a dream. It is through the analysis of his OUT OF EGYPT that we collect the information that indicates what, in its form of awakened text, Civilization may repress.
While Ahmed Osman exalts the 18 years Tut as a Saint, a Christic figure, when he may very well be the spoiled and nasty character that History probably remembered - and while he concurrently downgrades Semenkhkare for whom he seeks no related Biblical figure, even though he had been Akhnaton's co-regent - we must consider as a strong indication, what the dreamer blatantly represses, that is the constant elusion of the Hellenique record in OUT OF EGYPT. Sophocles gave precisions about the Polyneices and Eteocles, heirs of Thebes. Akhnaton (if Oedipus) in exile, cursed his two sons and prophesied mutual slaughter to both of them. The "heritage that Oedipus divideth to his sons" as a "mortal enmity" is told in the play OEDIPUS AT COLONUS (ref#2).
This is however tempered by ANTIGONE, who later sacrifices herself for restoring the memory and the soul of Polynices, who can be recognized as Semenkhkare. The identification of Eteocles with Tutankhamon is also suggested by many clues. As Freud refused to evaluate these similarities after K.Abraham's suggestion, Ahmed Osman ignores them after my conversation with him. Therefore, unable to exploit the large amount of information pouring from Sophocles historical record, he can but reach partial conclusions, with several serious modifications which he imposes on the Sacred Scriptures.

Fortunately, this disposition opens to an unexpected perspective - where the intellectual sacrifice that is a dream, recovers a restoring meaning.

Analyzing Ahmed Osman's first shrunk hypothesis and then unfolding it, allows for a wonderful reconstruction of a substantial pre-history of Christianity. With a possible suffering Polynice (Semenkhkare) shadowed under the honor given to a 'Wicked Priest' (Tutankhamon/Eteocles), a new perspective of the end of the 18th Dynasty shows a conflict and a failure, requiring for a redemption, hence a logical Jesus Christ to be coming at the end of a 'Moses Cycle' (Old Covenant). I wish that this paragraph speaks well enough for indicating the immense progress Ahmed Osman may offer for the understanding of the act and meaning of Jesus Christ, as recalling and solving (what we may call) the Karma (the Unconscious) of the Amarnian children, as soon as, after centuries, the Roman Empire, at last, freed the way for releasing the operation of Trismegistus (New Covenant).

At this point, I shall now support the analysis with a comparison

As many books before it, OUT OF EGYPT gives an appalling description of the manifestation of Christianity. There is no evidence except for forgeries in supporting Jesus Christ's historicity. Moreover, earlier traditions show rituals of Christianity, and mention aphorisms which were later attributed to Jesus Christ. The picture worsens even more when it is seen from the point of view of the Roman interest in fabricating a character who would help repudiate the role of Egypt in the Roman Mediterranean.
However, Ahmed Osman's expose is weakened by its repression of the Greek affairs in the Mediterranean world. It does not recognize that Ancient Egypt was less of a victim of Rome than was the 'Ptolemaic' (Greek) - for the very struggle of Rome, from the Socratic start, was with the Athenian legacy and identity. Following our above comparison this would be compared with the necessity for Miss Civilization, to address her mother's part in her Psyche.
A reader would recognize this symptomatic absence running all along chapters 18 to 22, until it turns into a state of frenzy with the abjection of Greece in the ending pages. This sudden presence of Greece starts when the last Chapter ends in mentioning the hideous founding of Constantinople. Then a CONCLUSION excludes all but two routes to Rome - either Jewish or Egyptian in the name of Serapis. Remarkably Ahmed Osman presents Serapis however with only Greek attributes, Zeus, Asclepius, Haedes - and finally, in an EPILOGUE, he develops the classical abomination of the Enlightenment with its post-nazi reputation, representing an illegitimate Greek culture.

NOTE : Secondariness of the secondary - from Mother tongue to Father pen Psychoanalysis shows that one cannot reasonably look back at a mother's influence without clarifying the process of her own reflection. This is regulated by her desire - and this desire is manifested through the naming of the Father. As linguistics of the Letter shows, this Name combines an exiled being (repressed) and two representants for building up his metaphor [ (see also Freud's first Principle )]. These two representants are remnants of Narcissism, which was the preceding phase of the Psyche and Civilization in progress. They are the replicating  [ NOTE WT : I say also doubling for indicating the secondary process that the letter supports - In shall write replicating/doubling] the process of Writing that Ahmed Osman depicts in the early life of Civilization. I shall now describe this logic of symbolization, mention, memory, absence and naming, as Ahmed Osman reveals it in Chapters 19-20, when he interprets Paul and Peter, as the Keepers of the Keys.

In the early Christianity, Ahmed Osman describes the first Pope, Holy Father, as a replicate/double for Jesus Christ, although he does not mean to notice it. According to his description, in order to establish the structure of a hierarchy, with the use of an artificial construct for a Ceremonial Magic (Propaganda), the budding ecclesiastic authority of Rome would have 'resurrected' Peter (Simon the Essenian, apostle of the Jews of Jerusalem) and transported him to Rome, where he is said to have been martyred. Ahmed Osman's demonstration of this possibility is credible. but what makes it so remarkable is that it would have replicated/doubled exactly the structure that he also sees in Jesus Christ, resurrected Tut whose character would have been transported to Jerusalem where he is said to have been martyred. The establishment of the first Father representative would have thus been processed like a Writing process (the Letter doubling the representativity of the Mother tongue).

		Essay
		WRITING (applied to) HISTORY A reader should be especially interested by the fact that Ahmed Osman explains why the Bible may show discrepancies, by the fact that a certain gap of an oral tradition existed between the Exodus and its report later in writing by the Rabbis. Yet this contradicts in principle that Moses would have transmitted the knowledge of writing. Perhaps is it a more subtle gap which lodges in the essence of the Letter, that Ahmed Osman will help to discover. What does mean to "resurrect and to transport" ? In regards with the topic of linguistics, there is little hesitation. The Letter is a material vehicle, which resurrects and transports a meaning. The Old Covenant - aka Ministry of the Letter - was certainly processing this basic ontology. It was also named the Ministry of Death (in opposition with the New Covenant, Ministry of Word, and Ministry of Life), for when I use the Letter, the transportation of my will, in another time or place, signifies me, in spite of my possible death, yet restoring my presence in absentia as a imaginary person. It is a very different case when I animate my Word in a place where I have physically moved; such Ministry of Word is still conditioned by my life - it stands for a biological speech of my 'code', and this development explains why today we should examine the process of historicity in terms of corporality (or whatever seme which would represent the Logic of Code and/or Environment). In resurrecting and transporting we credit that a corpse is left in the first place and that a ghost is suggested in the second. In his reading of Christianity, this is what Ahmed Osman describes. According to Freud, this process adds a necessity of violence. It was Freud who claimed that Akhnaton had been virtually resurrected and transported, as a living Moses, thus conveying the meaning of a murder. Apparently, Ahmed Osman, as well as Sigmund Freud, are neglecting a surplus dimension which is attributed to the Letter according to certain traditions . A function of the letter which is sometimes called Hieroglyphic, or Seeming, Semblance or meme has been regularly suggested by linguists and historians, who suggested that - if Akhnaton-Moses had indeed delivered a Knowledge, it would have been a secret Letter , thus implying an additional transmission to the visible one on the Sinai. Hence, it is necessary to mention the Orpheus hypothesis  , in which Hermes and Oedipus encompass the dimension of the Letter within Christianity. The murder of Akhnaton may not have happened, as well as the murder of Jesus-Christ which is controverted and counteracted in essence by the resurrection factor. The guilt fantasm of their assassination may not be confused with the actual deeds that put an end to Semenkhkare and Tutankhamon who look like two irresponsible (innocent) infants. The Ministry of the Letter (aka Ministry of Death) which is sublimated by the pairing Moses-(Akhnaton)-followed-by-Jesus-Christ-(any man who has been The one of the plural identity of modern sociology first begun with Christianity) spares the murder. It also in fact escapes the guilt, in proving that the Unconscious allows either secret exile or resurrection. The compulsion that is the 'replicating/doubling' of the Letter is a structural necessity, whose status is a Symptom as long as it is not identified. Psychoanalysis, in the stream of the apocalyptic production of Cybernetics, has provided this identification . Whatever fantasm or reality, Ahmed Osman's Simon/Peter indicates this part of the process which is included in the larger Ministry of Truth. Jesus Christ's Ministry of Truth/Life transcends this Writing of the Ministry of the Letter (replicating/doubling) which was imposed by the Rabbis and the Essenians of Jerusalem when they used Simon (resurrecting and transporting him, as if it was what had already been done with Jesus-Tut). It is also beyond the Ministry of Word as stated by Paul, the therapeutae of Gnostic tradition, who was not conditioned by the hierarchy of the Letter but proceeded from Self-authorization and was representing the ancient Egyptian tradition We know that it is after the dismissal of the Delos principles that Athens put Socrates, its most advanced initiate, to death - after he foresaw the fall of the city with the concurrent rise of Rome. Shortly after his death, Athens indeed felt into its Ptolemaic version in Egypt, and Athens was displaced into Alexandria. The Hellenic secret Schools/teachings which had begun to flourish in the Aegean after Akhnaton's era, continued on by Heliopolis and Hermopolis Magna, beside the religious popular occult writings of Israel. This was constituting an ancient Mideast, in contrast with the empowering Rome which eventually colonized it and dominated the entire Mediterranean. The logical process of civilization was thus bringing to Rome two primitive early narcissistic function of the Letter (Essenian and Gnostics) and shifted a secondary process of writing. The two stances of the Letter which are described by Psychoanalysis conclude an interpretation that announces the production an industry of cybernetics . The two continuing stances appeared in Christianity as Vaticanism and Hermetism which eventually opposed each other during The Renaissance. They have achieved the base for an Artificial Intelligence which shows up today, absorbing the Letter and leaving the human mind free of its Ministry. It is the moment when Truth encompasses both the Letter (Peter) and the Word (Paul). It is also the base which will only begin to make it possible to assume what History and corporality are, and thus comprehend what is a Historical Being.

CONCLUSION Ahmed Osman presents a study which is current even after 2000 years - about the historicity of Jesus Christ. He advances it with much of the information which precipitated during the 20th Century - e.g. the archeological findings while he applies the psychology of the Freudian Model. He also neglects certain recent information and traditional memories (Hermetism, Hellenism). Applying his deduction from the Egyptology in regard to the 18th Dynasty, he develops a remarkable hypothesis, which is certainly worthy of interest. When he applied it at the end of the Amarnian period, he would have been more credible if he had identified Semenkhkare instead of Tutankhamon. Neglecting the former, and repressing the Oedipus data in History, he depicts the latter as a Saint who is followed by a delusion. Would he have been more integral, he would have disclosed a sin and its redemption. Semenkhkare (Polynice), the Suffering Servant of the Scriptures and Tut (Eteocles), his adversary Priest, were political events for a spiritual tradition which necessitated a reparation, in political ways, at the end of the Old Covenant (the veil of Moses upon Hermetism). Civilization could then enter into its Roman phase. In any case Ahmed Osman does not close the question of the event which manifests on the hinge between the New and Old Covenant. In showing that there is no historical evidence for an historical being there, he supports the Christian structure (if he had shown an historical evidence of Jesus Christ, that culture could have been invalidated)

Zenon Kelper, NY, 98/10/31 12:01

FOOT NOTES

NOTE 05 : The appreciation of what is Real through the grid of a revisited irrealism, which is found through dreams, cuts, symptoms, surrealism, slips, fantasms, etc., is the step that the 20th century critical mind has reached with the primary step of Psychoanalysis, and will probably to be completed with the effects of Artificial Intelligence<back to ref#1><back to ref#2>

NOTE 07 : by spiritual entity, Ahmed Osman means a memory, and/or a virtual figure made up for propaganda <back to text>

NOTE 10 : this structure of linguistics has been exemplified thanks to the Lacanian stage of Psychoanalysis, as I deciphered how a purloinment of the Letter hides its own version  <back to text>.

NOTE 20 : I am not pessimistic - as I have proven in my dissidence with the Lacanian followers, that I don't consider the impossibility of a verifiable data as being irrevocable, nor justifying a System of Death. All the opposite is what is suggested with the use of Cybernetics with Psychoanalysis, and their formulation.. A verification may be possible when mankind couples its Psyke to Artificial Intelligence, and perhaps with other biological improvements in the field of reproduction and sexuality (as hormones control and DNA engineering indicate a transformation in libido and naming functions). <back to text>

NOTE 25 : Actually, this may even be the very split where an ek-sistence finds its human reason. In Ahmed Osman's perspective, the real experience of dissociation that the Minor Tribal King bears would establish this being as historical, after the hysterical TuthMoses (Hysteria being the subjective animation from the drive, prior to its subjective representation) <back to text>

NOTE 30 : the two mechanisms - displacement and condensation - of the Freudian theory are to be found in detail in Ahmed Osman's text. They involve Jerusalem and its 'holy' name, with Quades conquered by TuthMoses - as well as the elusion of the same Quades of Ramses.2, the most well-known and exquisite condensation of the repression that Ahmed Osman relates. <back to text>

NOTE 31 : In the "" formula, N represents Megddo which signifies the occult desire Y of the Father (in Jerusalem, City of Peace), and Y represents Ramses' Quades, which conclude the 18th Dynasty endeavor. As such, 'Quades' is repressed (as Ahmed Osman practically shows; meaning the unawareness of Ramses' Quades in the representation of the Atoniam solution) as the Freudian theory predicts, stating that the repression strikes the secondary representand of the Father's name, n, alias, the Desire of the Mother<back to text>

NOTE 31b : The prefixe 'a' has been used by Lacan in an interesting and useful way. Beside its usual negative connotation, Lacan employed its algebraic form (for example, letter used as in a+b) for the use of his 'linguistics'. Thus '(a)' meant the beginning, the first as a letter, and the fact that the 'primal origin', the cause, could not find a signifier, yet could be counted. This is also meaning something different than the 'zero' as a cause. The Lacanian method do not call for the cause of reality - but for the 'cause of the desire'. An '(a)-story' is the cause that manifests from the foundation of the Desire.<back to text>

NOTE 32 : The three Oedipian plays by Sophocles may be found on the internet thanks to The Gutenberg Project <back to ref#1><back to ref#2>

NOTE 32b : or 'Josuha' ? Note of the Editor <back to text>

NOTE 33 : I use this expression conferring with flesh, as it is used by Ahmed Osman, taken from Paul's comments about his meeting with Jesus on the road to Damascus. Ahmed means that Paul's acknowledgement of Jesus would have been more credible if he had met him physically ; but Osman showed me that it does not make such a big difference to meet someone physically in regard to his public acknowledgement..:) <back to text>

NOTE 35 : Re: Ahmed Osman's reconstruction of a journey of Tutankhamon to the Sinai, attempting to bring his father (Akhnaton) back from his exile and renouncing to his rigid Monotheism. Yet, despites his efforts - says Ahmed Osman - to heal the religious wounds inflicted upon Egypt by his father's introduction of the One God, Tutankhamon was murdered, at the foot of Mount Sinai, on a spring evening in 1352BC- the slaying being done in the sight of Moses, before the door of the Tabernacle.<back to text>

NOTE 40 : The use of Ahmed Osman's clue in the opposite way than he built it for, is reinforced by the defect that he introduced in his construction. In his report, he chose an excerpt from the Gospels (attributed to Mark 9:2-4,7), which does not mention the unveiling of Moses' identity, which is the core, in any case, essential to the meaning of the Transfiguration Scene. As the Era of Moses-Josuah establishes the principle of Moses's veiling , it is not surprising that Ahmed Osman could not state its derogation, for it would have taken place in the very moment of its establishment. Thus he eludes it; and asserts an 'only clue' with an argument which is deprived of any core, as a dream must do. <back to text>

NOTE 50 : According to Siegfried Morenz, giving two references (Hatshepsut and Amenophis.3). <back to text>

NOTE 60 : This tradition of Self-authorization is sometimes referred to as the possible Self-enthronement of ThutMoses.3 who would have over-ruled his predecessor, Queen Hatchepsut <back to text>

NOTE 70 : Ahmed Osman mentions, at this moment, the 'omitted' mention of the founding act of TuthMoses - this refers to the Logic of Time and Logic of Anticipation  <back to text>

NOTE 80 : Studies exist that may demonstrate that certain Gospels were written during the eye-witness period of Jesus Christ<back to text>

END OF THE PAGE

FOOT PAGE

© William Theaux 1949-1999