About the mother tongue of Hermes Trismegistos
Hermes Trismegistos had been considered the father of wisdom. Tradition holds that he might be Tot, the ancient Egyptian god of wisdom. Some are of the opinion, that Tot was the son of Hermes.
Hermes lived well before the antic times of 5.000 years ago, but his lifespan reaches into time immemorial.
A small collection of his teachings and their explanations – Corpus Hermeticum – of Hermes Trismegistos – has been preserved in Greek translation, found in a cloister in 1460 and some parts of it 1945 in the Coptic language. From this collection grew the spiritual movement called hermetism that lasted for centuries.
In some parts of the text Hermes leads a conversation with Tot, in other parts he teaches Asclepius in form of a dialogue. Furthermore, the writings, statements and references of Asclepius are also important parts of the collection. The epoch of Hermes was definitely well before the time of Asclepius, but it was a general practice often used for teaching the form of imagined dialects.
The letter of Asclepios written to King Ammon is one of the 16 books of the collection.
I base my writing on a recent Hungarian translation of the book: “The way of Hermes” by Attila Porokai including the translation of the “Tabula Smaragdina” by Hamvas Béla. We concentrate here on details dealing with the language.
Asclepios describes the native tongue of Hermes in his letter to king Ammon (book 16/2, page 100):
“The text keeps its clear essence, when he expresses himself (Hermes) using his original language, because the sounding and sheer nature of the Egyptian language carries in itself the power of message being told.”
Asclepios therefore says that the original language of Hermes is quite unique, because – differently told – in this language even the word itself is saturated by ideas. He wouldn’t had written this to the king if it were not an exceptional attribute even at his time. We have to see further that Asclepios, in the above sentence, determined the essence of Hermes’ language in its vocabulary. The sentence: “The text keeps its clear essence” can only be interpreted that deep wisdom is hidden even in the words themselves.
Let’s see the text further:
“Dear King, as much as it is possible for you /…/ please make sure that these texts are not translated in order to prevent that these mysteries reach the Greeks. Because, the Greek language is arrogant, its loose and decorative style will drain the majesty and power from ours, which is guarding the power of the words. The Greeks, dear King, use empty words giving merely the impression of illusion. This is the philosophy of the Greeks: the peal of the words. We don’t use that kind of language, only powerful sounds.” (See again about Egyptian priests in chapter 9.)
This was therefore, the philosophy of the Greeks: ‘the peal of the words’. And he tells here not just:
language = word,
language = sounds full of power.
We are going to understand better the last expression later by discussing the examination of the word ‘tér’.
The mother tongue of King Ammon was probably also Egyptian, certainly not Greek.
“… we do not speak this kind of language…”
One can conclude from this that in ancient Egypt the language of science and philosophy has been continuously the language of Hermes, even in time of Asclepios.
Let’s now see, what Hermes wrote about his language:
“The name of nature means growing as well and it belongs to creations, which change and are movable and not movable at the same time; and belongs to the divine and humane which God creates all at once by his will.”
The words of a text having been translated into different languages several times, may have been changed greatly, but Hermes gives a list of things being named also by the word “nature”. He presents a characteristic system, a certain group, a “word-cluster” of his vocabulary. Based on this, the system is easy to recognise.
Furthermore, Hermes speaks about what had been said previously by Asclepios:
… the sounding and sheer nature of the Egyptian language carries in itself the power of message being told.”
Now, let’s try to interpret the sentence of Hermes. Don’t look for language-connections; after so many translations we won’t get any hold. We try to explore the system of idea he was writing about precisely. This could be done on any language. Thus, we do it with Hungarian words:
a.) ‘Természet’ is the name of nature in Hungarian.
b.) The name ‘természet’ (nature) means as well “növekedés” (growing).
The word ‘növekedés’<nœvɛkɛdesh> (growing) is not covering all the areas the természet (nature) means, but ‘growing’ is also included in the concept of ‘nature’. But we can’t use a different word (like növekedés) for describing the words belonging to the word-cluster of természet <tɛrmesɛt>. Thus, we have to investigate the members of the root “ter”. In first line words beginning with ‘ter’ like:
terem <tɛrɛm> (produce, yield) food ….,
terjed <tɛryɛd> (expand, increase)
terebélyesedik <tɛrɛbeyɛshɛdik> (grow in size, ramify)
kiterjedés <kitɛryɛdesh> (expantion)
termés <tɛrmesh> (crop, yield, growth)
terpeszkedik <tɛrpɛskɛdik> (sprawl, spread)
c.) (the concept of természet = nature): “… belongs to creatures, which change, are movable and not movable at the same time.”
Staying further with word, ‘ter’:
teremtmény <tɛrɛmtmenj> (creature)
termékenység <tɛrmekɛnjsheg> (fertility)
termékenyít <tɛrmekɛnjiit> (fertilise)
termékeny <tɛrmekɛnj> (productive)
terméskő <tɛrméshkœ> (natural stone)
termeszt <tɛrmɛst> (cultivate, produce)
természet <tɛrmesɛt> (nature)
természetes <tɛrmesɛtɛsh> (natural)
termet <tɛrmɛt> (stature)
terül <tɛruel> (extend, spread)
terület <tɛruelɛt> (ground, land)
terít <tɛríít> (spread)
térít <teríít> (divert)
táj <taay> (tájol = térel) (orientate)
terjeng <tɛryɛng> (extend)
téres <terɛsh> (extensive)
térség <tersheg> (open fields)
térkép <térkép> (map, chart)
terepít > r>l: telepít (colonize)
terpeszkedik (spread, sprawl)
terep <tɛrɛp> l>r telep (ground, territory)
tar (it has expansion = tér) (space, room, distance)
tárol > térel <térɛl> (store, storage)
társ>táros>téres <térɛsh> (are coming from one tér, area)
társadalom <taarshadalom> (society)
társaság <taarshashaag> (gathering, company)
társulat <taarsulat> (association)
and so forth
d.) Hermes told as well: “it concerns everything being created at once by the will of God.”
Terv (plan, intention)
End result: The concept of the word ter = tér = tár connects all the words from above. From the deepest essence, hidden picture, of the word “ter” blossomed all these words, they belong to its word-cluster.
Hermes Tris Megistos could have taken for his teaching the word Ter – Teremtő – Teremtés as well.
How could we appreciate this result?
We can’t speak abut language-identity. We compared words, not languages in our method, based it on conceptions and every language could have done it. However, we have to explain this perfect consonance and its explanation could give a final conclusion.
We started with the Hungarian word természet, but this can’t explain a randomly consonance in this scale. Hermes named exactly ‘natur’ for the starting word and in Hungarian we call it ‘természet’, no synonyms exist for this.
Starting with another word, the result would be zero but the start with ‘természet’ brought us 100% success. The two possible results are the mirror image of each other and this is decisive. There are no other words in the Hungarian vocabulary, which could have been suitable for the requirements given by Hermes. Further, we found by the guidance of Hermes the deep consonant system of a Hungarian word-group as well.
These enumerated Hungarian words are as deeply consonant as the words told by Hermes.
The meaning of these two heaps of words, the Egyptian and the Hungarian are identical also in their whole and parts. There is nothing special in our selection; we just pointed on ‘természet’ and a bunch of words starting with ‘ter’ popped up in the Hungarian vocabulary. Those words are all the branchy descendants of the tiny word-root ‘ter’. We followed all the way the instruction of Hermes and it has to be emphasized that no other word-cluster could replace it in Hungarian vocabulary.
But Hermes told also – regarding his words – that the same word (word-root) recurs in every word he described.
Here remained only two choices:
- there are two independent systems: one of Hermes and the other, we have presented above.
- one and the same system and then also the words have to be identical. (But granted that in old times some of the words were not as long-winded. For instance, instead of ‘termés’ the words ‘term’ or ‘térem’ could have done the job as well. Furthermore, the word ‘ter’ – being a root – may had been used with other extensions also.)
Hermes told further that the name of ‘nature’ is the connecting tie in every word he described. Thus, the result of our investigation depends on the answer for the question: can we find the word ‘ter’ with similar sounding and identical meaning in Egyptian vocabulary?
There are many beautiful books on the market about Egypt, its buildings and writings. The best book about Egyptian language and writing is “Csillagszoba” (Star room)by Borbola János.1 In this book we find the three hieroglyphs we need for our question. The sign looking like palm branch: = i,j and the hand = ad, ed. But see first the sign presenting the often-used sound ‘ar’:
meaning: tér (space)
If these words are common – however, they are common – than is the whole system common, because both systems are strongly coherent. This is supported also by the following expression:
t3 í(j) ed
adequate hung. counter pair: terítsd (spread it!)
The slight sound-difference of teríjed and terítsd is not weakening, rather strengthening the identity. The teríjed is a well-known Hungarian articulation used mostly in the south-west part of our country. The ending –ad, -ed like vigyed!, egyed!, adjad! (take it! eat it!, give it!), has a proving power in this case. Hungarian people say often merijed – merítsd, huzijad – húzzad and tömijed – tömjed (immerse it!, pull it! or stuff it!)
We see that there is a common part of the language of Hermes and of our language and the common word root ‘ter’ – the root of the word teremtés (creation) – belongs to this common word-cluster. Therefore, we have to accept the statement of the following Figure:
Word described the root tér the Hungarian counter
by Hermes is in the common pairs of the words
word-cluster of described by Hermes
With all these we completely proved the connection of these word-heaps of the Egyptian and Hungarian vocabulary.
The figure tells that all words of the two clusters do not have to be identical. The essence of the root system is that words being created on the same root belong to a common word-cluster. However, if two languages don’t have any contact for 2.000 and more years, their root-system will continue to build words on the same roots, but following the different demands of their speakers, these word-heaps may contain numerous different words and only the starting root, in our case: ’ter’, will remain identical. Therefore, it does not matter, how large are the heaps of the not identical words, this will not lessen the connection of the two vocabularies.
We proved with all these merely the identity of the word group built on the root ‘ter’. But could have been overtaken these words by the Hungarians? Even just these words?
Imagine, people visited Old Egypt in the time of Hermes and decided to take these words and build into their language.
Man calls this method in Hungarian: ‘mazsolázás’ (picking out one by one the best pieces), is not worth doing, because it won’t bring advantages for people speaking a different languages and do not understand or not even know the system of a root-language, the cohesive power of its system, because its deepest essence is in the whole of the vocabulary. Does the takeover language belong to a different category, the taken over words will soon lose the cohesive power, change into obscurity? Was however the investigated word group just a borrowing and countless other word followed them, our system would have broken shortly after. (See the Latin influence on Europe’s languages).
But we have common words and our root-system is healthy, only two choices remained:
- The Egyptians fetched a lot from the Hungarian, or
- The Hungarian and old-Egyptian language is identical.
I repeat, the completeness of the Hungarian root-system proves that never any considerable foreign layer from any other language was taken into. Because, any time just a ‘stumbling’ and the root system could have been over.
Having repeated our earlier statement, our goal is now to reach the final certitude. To reach this should be sufficient to prove that the demonstrated connection-system of the presented words (the ‘fer’ word-group) is merely the tip of the iceberg.
I am going to present – as everything exploring proof – the deepest system, which in its details never can be transferred to any other language and couldn’t have been transferred to us from any other language. Because for doing this, man have to transfer the words and also the word-creating ideology, grammar and life-philosophy without loss, completely.
Let’s quote Asclepios again:
The Greeks, dear King, use empty words giving merely the impression of illusion.”
There are however, in old-Greek many words appearing in Egyptian and Hungarian as well, but something is missing, the most internal, the regulating power of a system. Having read this and other books of mine, then you will know what is missing: the picture (image) hidden in the words has been lost from the mind of its users. (It is like becoming married merely to the wardrobe of a woman instead of herself).
Because, the most important thing is not the sounding of the word, but the hidden image in its root, telling its meaning to the listeners. What is such a language looking like, in which the words:
… the sounding and sheer nature of the Egyptian language carries in itself the power of message being told.”(Hermes)
“… it is not built just from words sounding hollow …” (Asclepios).
In the following, we will give answer to the question: why the previously listed Hungarian words can’t be takeovers from any other language?
We will present in the following the ancient word-root, picture of from Hermes named words: “természet” (nature), teremtés, termékenység (creation, productivity) and so forth:
This archaic basic root / picture is
TE = TÉ
It’s often used back vowels variant:
TA = TÁ
Czuczor Gergely wrote in his dictionary: “TA is a primordial root pointing to remoteness”, or he just told: “it is the abductor-tá” (using the form ‘ta’ or ‘te’ won’t make a difference). The pronoun ‘te’ (you) = is a person a little further than I am.
In its naked form, we just use this basic root, when we tell children: ‘we are going tá –tá.’
We could possibly best understand the basic idea of the root TA = TÁ = TE = TÉ by using of the extension –og:
TÁ-og = tág (wide, broad)
tágul (tá-og-ol) = tágul (extends, broaden)
tágít (tá-og-it) = tágít (enlarge, stretch, dilate)
tágasság (tá-og-as-ság) (spaciousness)
The primary meaning of the TE, TÉ, TA, TÁ is = “expanding”.
From this ancient root (morpheme), from the figurative image, picture of its meaning – in our case ‘TEr’ – can we produce by extensions the word-group (cluster):
TE, TÉ, TA, TÁ + -er, -or- ar. //Like seper, csupor, ökör (to sweep, mug, ox)//. (Think about, there were no grammar categories yet in old times.):
TE-er, contracted = TER
TÉ-ér, “ = TÉR
TA-ar, ‘ = TAR
TÁ-or, ‘ = TÁR
The meaning of these words: kiterjed, szétterül (expanding, spreading),
Like terel = térel (to direct, lead)
Its meaning pops up better from the l>z change of terel:
terez ortérez (to enlarge space).
It is remarkable that the sound ‘-m’ is often attached to ‘ter’: // like harm – három, verm – verem, halm – halom, szirm – szirom (three, pit, hill, petal). This m-sound at the end of words is a typical Hungarian development. It can be used alone or with a vocal before them. Such a vocal like before the ‘m’ without meaning can be found in several words: Mérges – méreges, érzék – érezék, hangzik – hangozik, igyekszik – igyekezik (poisonous, sense, sounding, being zealous).
We understand the words better by articulating with and without ‘m’. In the following listing both possibilities are open.
Now, let us resolve the meanings of the following words:
tér: it moves away from sg. In one or any direction: ~ kiterjed (expands).
terem = term, térem //like verem, alom (pit, litter)//: ~ kiterjedő (sg. expanding)
teremt = térem-et //like éget, siet (set on fire, to hurry)//: ~ kiterjedést hoz létre (establishes extension).
termet = téremet //like harmat, permet (dew, fine rain)// : ~ valami kiterjedése (expansion of sg, larger measure)
teremtő = téremető // like égető, járató (burner, a person letting walk)//: ~ the one who creates kiterjedést (expansion).
teremtés = téremetés: ~ the creation of kiterjedés, kiterjesztés (expansion, widening)
teremtett = téremetett // like vezetett, égetett (being lead, burned)// : ~ being made kiterjedővé (to be able to expand).
természet = téremeszet //like falat, szelet (bit, slize; the ‘sz’ means only lisping) //: ~ a kiterjedt valami (the expanded sg.) sg. omething)
természet = (good, bad attributes): the kiterjedés (extension) itself, but here spreads, extends just its effect)
természetes = téremészetes (natural, namely, is as the teremtő (creator)
teremtette (created) it, he made it to tér (expansion).
termés = téremés //like kelés, írás, as a thing (boil, writing)//:
~ terjedés, kiterjedt. It became tér, kiterjedés from nothing.
termék = téremék //like buborék, kerék, törek (buble, wheel, chaff)//: ~ térbe türemkedett valami, teremtett (a thing being fold into space, being created)
termékeny = téremékeny //like feszülékeny <fɛsuelekɛnj>, pirulékony (stretchable, blushful)//: ~ kiterjedni képes (able to expand.)
termékenyít = teremékenyít // like keményít (toughen, make harder)//: ~
kiterjedésre képesít (makes able to spread),
kiterjedést indítja (starts spreading)
terül = térel //like alakul, énekel (be formed, singing)//: ~
kiterjedésbe hatol (probe into expansion)
terpeszkedik = térepeskedik // like ügyeskedik <uedjeshkɛdik>, ágaskodik (show skill, rear, stand on tiptoe)//: ~
trying to become kiterjedtebb (more extended).
terebély = térebély //(like fekély, függöly <fɛkey, fueggœy> (ulcer, gooseberry)//: ~ térbe hatolt part (of sg., intruding the space)
terv = térv // like nyelv, sérv <sherv> (tongue, hernia) // : ~ plan, design, serving the kiterjedést (expansion, enlargement, or results from.
Here, man can say: “there is no way back”. It made me the shivers, when I realized what is hidden deep in our words. The immeasurable wisdom of faraway times came into sight suddenly. Who would have thought that his name is?
Teremtő, because he created the kiterjedést (expansion),
He teremt (creates), because he creates kiterjedést,
Termés is again and again the new kiterjedések (expansions)
termékeny (fertile, productive), because he is able to produce new kiterjedést (expansions)
termékenyít (fertilizes), because he starts new kiterjedést an so forth.
The Universe is therefore, előtüremkedett kiterjedés <ɛlœtuerɛmkɛdɛtt> an emerging, blossoming expansion, like a ‘bubble’.
The expansion came not from nil, but from the ancient One, the number 1. (See the book “The secret and power of the proto-One” by Kiss Dénes.) And everything, but everything what comes into being (term) in this kiterjedés (expansion) is a new and new blubber of identical worth of it (térem). As we already knew it: “everything is 1”. See for this the “Professional appreciation of Tabula Smaragdina / Corpus Hermeticum” (page 156):
“ I see myself in everything and everything in myself, I am in the ocean and the ocean is in me, I am in the trees and the trees are in me.”
Heremes tells the same about God (book 9. /Hermes to Asclepios, 9/56:
… nothing is outside of Him, neither is He outside of anything.”
Hermes, himself says in Tabula Smaragdina 2/154:
“Wat’s below is the same as what’s above and what’s above is the same as what’s below. This way you understand the only miracle.”
We learned hereby, for what reason we say ‘másvilág’ <maashvilaag> (the other world, the beyond), because this world is the ‘mása’ (copy) of the beyond, which is again the copy (mása) of the world below.
We see, reading an ancient text from old Egypt, the explanation of our word ‘mása’ popped up. (The two worlds are each other’s mirror image and due to this, we have been entombing our dead people in a way that all what they could use in the “másvilág” (beyond), had been put on their mirrored side in a handy way. (sable on the right, for example).
There are for example, two different names for ‘two’: ‘kettő’ and the 1 ‘mása’ (copy of 1). Kettő means the One broken in two parts is a ‘bad’ name, results in two ‘fél’ (=2 x ½). Fél (half) = being afraid not finding the other half to produce the One again. Become certain not to find the missing half we my fall into ‘kétség’(doubt).2 We call a good friend ‘felebarát’. The both together make up the One.
However, the ‘mása’ (copy) of 1, the mirror of One = 1.
If people look at each other, the look into ‘egymás’ (each other’s) eyes. I can say: travelling ‘másod magam’ (with my copy=two person=1).
We call somebody missing an eye: félszemű (half eyed), a leg, a hand: féllábú, félkezű (half legged or handed), Thefeleség (wife) means, man and women make together the 1.
The 1 is the mirror image of Teremtő(creator), the One. Only the 1 is perfect. Everything being whole is perfect, therefore 1.
Our number-names are also parts of the system: ‘ket’ = két, ‘horim’ = három, ‘nyi egy’= négy.
Man has to see: deep knowledge, philosophy is hidden independently in every word, but in the whole together is the all-embracing wisdom. However, such a deep, unified, self-confident content, even approaching the Universe can’t come into other language just by randomly takeover of a heap of words.
It could have been taking either the whole or nothing.
We can’t look over the whole old-Egyptian vocabulary. But we should try to get an answer to the question: could had been created two kinds of such a language as well? We are going to try.
The basic roots TE, TÉ and the previously presented roots MO (mál, vál) and HO (har…) did develop an uncountable number of variants in their own word clusters. But the vocabulary is limited and a simple division showed us that the number of the basic roots can’t be more than around 20 or less. The number of sounds is limited as well. At the same time, the Hungarian and Egyptian vocabularies work by the same essence. A possible difference could pop up, if we exchange the names of the basic roots with each other’s? But in this case the one vocabulary would be just merely the mapping of the other.
Could we find three or four identical basic ancient roots, we can already exclude the difference, because this only can happen, if all roots are identical. Based on the dictionary of the book “Star Room” of janos Borbola, we are able to compare the following basic roots:
TÉR: the Egytian meaning of it is also a= tár, tér, rét
‘horus’ = rising like the Sun, arising as well;
‘horim’ = három (three); ‘hiru’ = hír (news)
‘haras’ = haraszt (brushwood); ‘harp’ = harap (to bite)
SZÁR:‘szar’ = ‘szár’(stalk); ‘szarb’ = ‘szarv’ (horn); ‘szarp’ = ‘szárba’.
NYŐ, NYI, NÖV, NEV:
‘nefer’ = ‘nevel’ (rear, augments); ‘-nyi’ = mérték (amount)
‘nuity’ “nyújti’ = ‘nyútja’ (stretch) or ‘nyitja’ opens) RO: ‘ra’ = rá (onto it); ‘rokhot’ = ‘rakott’, ‘odatett’ (loaded);
‘mar’ = ‘maró (corrosive); ‘mor’ = ‘már’ (already);
‘merer’ = ‘merül’, ‘miröl’ (submerge, about what)
‘modü’ = ‘mond’ (to say)
Man can state after these comparisons, that we certainly dealing with one language.
Let’s quote again Corpus Hermeticum, second book / 10, 2, last paragraph:
“Nothing, what exists is emptiness, only the nonexistence means emptiness, far from being. Namely, the being can never be empty”
According to Western thinking however, the ‘nothing’ exists. In the Hungarian thinking and speech, the nothing does not exist. In order to deny a not existing thing, man can speak about just in elaborated multiple steps.
Let’s disintegrate the words below into their original parts (we use them today only in contracted form). Use ‘mi’ in the form of a strong statement: valami > vala mi. Now:
Sincs <shinch> = se nincs <shɛ ninch> = nɛm nɛm
(Is not … either = neither is not = not not)
Sem <shɛm> = sɛ nɛm = nɛm nɛm
(Neither = neither not = not not)
Semmi = se nem mi = nem nem vala mi
(Nothing = neither not any = not not something)
It happens similarly by expressing the other way:
itt nincs semi se (here is nothing neither). The ‘se’ separated from ‘sincs’, remained ‘nincs’ and the ‘se’ came to the end of the expression:
semi sincs = se nem mise nincs = nem nem vala mi nem nem
The same with mathematical signs: – – + – –
Namely, the word ‘mi’ points to the being and it needed to have something to deny. We can’t do anything with absence.
We think the same way by strong or uncertain statements:
de (but): + alig (barely): +
dehogy (not at all): – aligha (hardly): –
dehogynem (of course): ++ alighanem (most likely): ++
We discussed earlier about -etlen = -telen expressions. For example: the difference fej-etlen = fej-telen (headless). The words egy-etlen = egy-telen are built the same way and taking care of its meaning, we may receive the same result:
Egy<ɛdj> (One): +
Egytelen <ɛdjɛtlɛn> (sole): –
Egytelenegy <ɛdjɛtlɛnɛdj> (One and only): ++
Hermes speaks about his own name, but most probably the attribute “Trismegistos” results from the translation into Greek. Hermes himself did not use this word, see Tabula Smaragdina / 14. / page 154:
“Man calls me Hermes Trismegistos, because I own three parts of the World’s knowledge.”
The text tells exactly that man calls him
Herm, harm, hárm
Because he owns három (3) parts of the world’s knowledge therefore, it’s fore sure that the name of Hermes contains the name of the
number 3 = Herm
further the Egyptian ‘horim’, ‘horm’ = 3. The ‘s’ at the end of his name is a Greek product therefore, he was called most probably ‘Hormu’, because our ancestors called the other numbers similarly as ötü, hotu, hetü (5, 6, 7) as well.
This was enough to state that we can honour in Hermes’ name our number-name three: ‘három’. They differ only in the sound-order:
front <> back vowels.
Furthermore, harm, harm, három means as well: teljes <tɛlyɛsh>, tökéletes <tœkelɛtɛsh> (whole, perfect).3
The word Harmonia is coming from here, also the Hungarian aphorism: “három a magyar igazság” (three is the Hungarian truth). The Hungarian truth is whole.
The interpretation of teljes, tökéletes (whole, perfect) is coming from here as well.
The word Trismegistos is further informative: we don’t have connection to ‘tris’ or to the ending ‘–os’. The meaning of ‘megist’ is ‘magaszt’ like ‘magasztos’ (outstanding), in Latin: ‘magistratus’ = a high-ranking person in office… The words lap-os and szél-es (flat and wide) came from lap and szél (plan, edge) and this is the way how our word ‘mag’ (seed) has been extended to ‘magos’ (eminent, salient) and further to ‘magasztos’ (exalted, august).
The name of Hermes Trismegistos means perfectly:
Háromszor Magasztos Hárm .
Going further: The name of the girlfriend of Hermes remained in Greek language ‘Erse’ = ‘Harmat’ (dew) in Hungarian. Harmat, built //like falat, méret (bite, measure)// is the distillate of wholeness and perfection.4
Hermes and Ersé
Harmu and Harmat, his Lowe.
In their marriage became intertwined the two faces of wholeness, of truth and being.
We finish the story of Hermes with the matter our book is dealing as well: the genesis of the word.
First book, Poimandress to Hermes, 9/ 17:
“…(Nous) he gave life by word to Nous, the creator of the world”
First book, Poimandres to Hermes / 5, 16:
“the holy word brake forth from the light/…/
Fourth book, Hermes to Tot / 1., 35:
“/…/ The Teremtő (Creator) created the whole cosmos, not with his hands, but by his WORD/…/”
I confess, as much (more) I learned about the essence of our words, the more and more I become confused. May be, there are some things not totally right what I was taught in the sciences or in religion.
The Bible declares: “in the beginnings there was the verb”, but it was the ‘Word’ told Hermes many year-thousands before. (This came into the Bible as a copy of the origin, having lost its shine and the essence became to smog).
Or it seems, some of the creating words did appear in this book?
PO, or were the vocals various and the consonants only new-comers? I do not know.
Or was just one word and all were the mirror images of this?
How much we could approach the essence?
Man can more interesting things gather from the previously quoted texts. For example, Asclepios (Asclepi) and Hermes (Harm) spoke the same language however, many thousand years supposed to be the distance between them. Hermes lived around 10.000 BC (?) and Asclepios in Old-Greek times. This tells us that their language was endless old.
At the same time, it became clear that this language clearly lays hidden in the Hungarian; is necessarily being identical with it.
We found finally, an irrefutably proof of the very old archaic age of our language.
The quoted text tells further that Asclepios was fully aware of its high value, because he told about its most fundamental essence. It’s interesting his judgment about the Greek language: “their words sounds hollow”.
He recognized that the spiritual deterioration runs parallel with that of the language. His meaning about the translation of Hermes’ teaching into Greek: “it will fad out the grandeur and power of ours, which keeps the power of the words”. Asclepios, therefore, defended this perfectly built archaic language.
For this, we can honour Asclepios as the first known defender of the Hungarian language. Don’t forget: Asklepi.