ICHTHYOS 1.1 VESICA PISCES. Her Mothership The Challice

The Mother and Building Block Of All Geometry

Similar to the shape of an American foot-ball, it looks like four out of any fully functioning human beings nine orifices (including eye sockets). Those biological gateways through which we are born, we see, speak and copulate!

It is the seed, the womb, the symbol of birth, the doorway to life on Earth. It is personified in femanine forms such as Mary or Isis. It is the, conjunction, cuniunctio, tertium comparationis, the individuation; the merger, balance and reconciliation of oposites.

Ladies and gentlemen, Chalices and Phalluses,
The truly wholly, Virgin Mother.

The Vesica Pisces

From here on referred to as the Chalice.

The Chalice is the image of the common area of two converging circles. Metaphorically Heaven to Earth and self to Self.
In biology she is the image of unicellular (or cell) division, mitosis, meiosis, karokynesis.

From here add another circle and you have a triquetra.

“….He called out that they should cast their net on the right side of the boat. Having done so, they were unable to draw it out for the multitude of fishes in it. John then recognized Jesus and told Simon Peter, who put on his fisher’s coat and jumped into the sea. The other disciples followed him in the boat to the shore, which was about 200 cubits away, dragging the net with the fishes. When Simon Peter drew it to land it was found to be “full of great fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so many, yet was not the net broken.” The number of Σιμων ὁ Πετρος, Simon Peter, is 1925, so Peter can be represented by a circle with circumference 1925 and diameter 612½ or 612. This is appropriate because 612 is the number of ὁ ποιμην ἀγαθος, the Good Shepherd, and that is the title which Simon Peter inherits when, following the incident of the 153 fishes, he is told three times by Jesus, “Feed my sheep.” Six more circles of the same dimensions are drawn for the six other disciples, and the seven are packed together in the most economical way

and placed inside the circular boat, like the coracle of the Celtic saints, the diameter of which is 1224. The disciples are told to cast their net on the right side of the boat. This is done geometrically by placing the compass point on the circumference of the circular boat and drawing an arc of another circle with the same radius, containing a Vesica Piscis (bladder of the fish). The rhombus within it is divided up into sixteen smaller diamond shapes.
Its width being 612, each of its sixteen divisions has a width of 153. They represent sixteen small fishes making up a greater seventeenth, and here again the number 153 is brought out, for 153 is the sum of the numbers from 1 to 17. The measure around the four sides of the greater rhombus-fish is 2448 or 1224 + 1224 or το δικτυον, the net, plus ἰχθυες, fishes. Thus the net full of 153 fishes is illustrated in number and geometry.

Verse 11:11 is where the miracle of sight for the blind finally takes place. 1111 has become well known to modern eyes as a number of awakening and enlightnment. It can be said that 1111 is a cure for ignorance and blindness, the power of sight, a phrase such we will revisit soon.

The phrase “he blew in his eyes” is interesting becase of the PIE (Proto Indo European) root *bhle-“to blow“, in the etymology of the word bladder. This just before applying the “gall” to Tobis’ eyes.

Also in verse 11:11 are a pair of consecutive typos. Where it should say “it worked” instead it says “ait workeda”. In two ways this is significant.

The word “it” points, once again, to the most significant event in the story. That is the healing of blind eyes via the fish bladder. Since the original text was Hebrew, “ait” is significant because it foreshadows a Hebrew word to be examined later, namely “et” and phoneticaly “ait”  refers us to the number 8. The Greek letter a is a fish shape. We might translate the phrase ” ait workeda” to 8 worked fish!

The next few sections are an effort to cover most of the words relevant to the Fish and Chalice, along with other facts and subjective commentary. This in order to get past the bulk of them, as quickly yet efficiently as possible.

On to 1.2 ETYMO-VESICA

© Chris ViGiL Quenzer 2011

ICHTHYOS 1.0
The Introduction
A synoptic study of unconscious syncretism surrounding the archetype of fish.

Is it likely that here, in the end of the age of Pisces, and the dawn of the new age (Aquarius), it might be somehow beneficial to examine the past through the eyes, or understanding, of the symbol (Pisces) that mankind has associated with it?

That is the task of this work, to find out if such perspective might edify us. This entire web site is based on the hypothesis that unconscious syncretism or the meaningful syncing of otherwise foreign thoughts and events does exist, and is meaningful, therefore informative. One need not believe or disbelieve the possibility. The best way to approach this hypothesis, like any other, is to suspend belief and view the facts with an open, yet skeptical, minds eye.

ICHTHYOS may be viewed as a subjectively guided, encyclopedia tour of the fish stories of man, but it is much more. The reader will find each story relating to others in such unlikely, yet meaningful ways, that it may be difficult to see any way around the idea of a hidden hand, of one sort or another, moving events, altering records or even controlling minds. For some, the numinous vibe of it all may necessitate a divine intervention explanation. For others, only an ancient elite class of bloodlines could have orchestrated such a globally cohesive history. No doubt, the new generation of wu thinking fertilized by the incredulous history channel, will chalk it up to alien intervention. A Jungian type thinker will likely conclude that somehow it was all subconsciously and/or unconsciously constelated to be exactly as it is, in conformity with an evolutionary psychological archetype. Perhaps in order to inform the conscious ego of the inner workings behind the veil of consciousness; the depths of the collective mind. Still most skeptics will be unable to see past mere coincidence and find reading any further more than difficult, laborious and shameful even. Any lengthy endurance of this content by these will have the unfortunate result of black and blue foreheads, possibly even frontal lobe damage from continuous face palming.

Those who have succumb to a certainty in their convictions, as to all the big questions, explain it away quickly with a belief in conspiracy, deity, spirits, aliens or even hyper dimensional beings etc. Philip K Dick, for example, might attribute it all to a being from the future whom he named VALIS. Though he was a man who perpetually develouped new theories and almost simultaneously dismissed them.

Contrary to the paranormal, extraordinary or numinous explanations, strong sceptics most often pass these things off as pure chance occurrences with just as fallacious a certainty as the rest. Ironically the same “nay sayers” quite often use an argument that sounds like a paraphrasing of biblical red letters, “If you look for it, you will find it” or “one can find any meaning, as long as one has the will to do so”. The exact quote would be “Seek and you shall find”. The point is not moot, but is confused for a conclusive debunking of the other possibilities.

Counter to the sceptics rational, quantum physics has all but proven that, indeed, the interaction of random potential alone morphs chaos into order, wave to particle, reality to actuality. The interaction of observation, it seems, should all the more influence the results of the interaction. So perhaps, yes, Jesus and skeptic alike, you’re right. If we seek (observe), Incidentally, we will find (manifest). Perhaps not.

To reiterate in a more casual language. The argument of the skeptic is often stated as, “Upon the purchase of a new car, one sees the same make and model more often, because of being aware of it, and though it may seem so, there are not suddenly more of them on the road as the believer supposes.”

But the truth may well be that we are more aware of them and there are suddenly more on the road. The theory of a multiverse is a valid contender amongst relevant scientific theories. Perhaps they were there all along, and the conscious state has merely shifted them into focus. Given one of an infinite number of probabilities in reality, would this not have to be true? When driving off the lot with a new car, -in the same instance where it drops in value- the awareness of it, the observation of the road and its populace increases, causing a fork in the road of perception and perceivable. A new awareness filters in an alternate universe; a world where indeed that make and model is more present in mind and matter. If this is true, then our awareness is like a steering wheel, navigating the map of variable reality. Our current location is the actuality we experience in an infinite reallity of locations.

In any case, we don’t know. Thus far we are incapable of devising experiments to practice in order to reach any reasonable conclusion. Certainty of any kind is premature and unjustified.

Meaning is the foundation of all symbolism, and meaning is a psychological phenomenon, a product of consciousness. It is reasonable then to conclude that the most adequate perspective for making sense of anomalous symbolic alignments is probably that of Jungian Psychology. After all, Carl Jung is the man who coined such terms as ‘collective unconscious’ and ‘synchronicity’, which, for this reason, Syncphany primarily utilizes for understanding. Not for belief or agenda, but as hypothesis. It is not, in other words, dogmatically assumed that this is the correct answer, but made use of as the only model of the principle at hand, that doesn’t take a giant leap of faith or deny any other reasonable possibility. It is built on the collaboration of quantum physics and psychology. So it is that the Jungian system will be examined in parallel with the facts. Not to leave out other explanations, we will examine them all in time.

Ultimately we are confined, by reason and our lack of knowledge, to reserve certainty and, for the time being, simply regard this work as an art form. So, pareidolia, apophenia or what ever it may be, relax the argumentation and enjoy the beauty of the patterns to follow.

Interestingly enough, this author did not know of it until well into the research and writing of ICHTHYOS, but Jung himself did a marginally similar study of the fish symbol in his book ‘Aion‘. (See C.G. Jung’s collected works 9-11.) Jung himself had some personal fish constellating synchronistic events, which will be covered later in ICHTHYOS.

The title ‘ICHTHYOS‘ is a play on two Latin words and their Greek root words.
1. Ichthyology, Latin for the study of Ichthys, Greek for fish.
2. Theology, Latin for the study of theo, Greek for god.

‘Theo’ is homophonically embedded into Ichthyology by “coincidence”. Also, by “coincidence”, ‘theo’ is spelled out within ‘ichthyology’, but with a ‘Y’ in place of the ‘E’.

The sole or primary gods in several belief systems (Christianity included) are either half fish, all fish or associated with fish.

So, if one were inclined to coin a word for the study of belief in fish related god(s), ‘ichthyology’ (or ichtheology) would be just as, if not more appropriate, as ‘ichthyology’ is in standing for the zoological study of fish.

It could be argued that the zoological term should be something like ‘ichthology’ to eliminate the homophone and nearly matched spelling of ‘theo’.

Although since the word ‘ichthyology’ is, according to dictionaries, a Latin word, while it’s root, ‘ichthys’, is Greek, perhaps the Latin term for fish, ‘pisces’ would have been a more suitable root. In such a case the word would be something like, ‘pisceology’. The problem there would be the similarity to the existing word piscatology (where did that ‘AT‘ come from?), which sounds like a study of urinating cats, but is the study of the art of fishing. If the coiner(s) were so bothered by such similarities, the word also could have branched from English and used fish-ology or from the root of ‘fish’ to sprout the word fisk-ology. Any of these would have avoided the inevitable confusion with a study such as this.

By the way, for English word coiners who take issue with and avoid similarities in words with completely different definitions, their problem there shows how wiser than most they’re.

Unfortunately a humble digression is in order. Despite this, and Carl Jung’s work, the study of fish related belief systems is not and has not been ‘a thing’, while ‘ichtheology’, as ‘a thing’, goes all the way back to the 1640’s. Even though somehow ‘-ology’ is attested only as early as 1800. Yet again, martyrology is the earliest ‘-ology’ word, on record as early as the 1590’s.

Go figure, it’s all rather fishy. Leave it to the ‘professionals, those good old academia nuts. Perhaps the maylay that follows is ridiculous, but it is curious. Would the study of the suffix ‘-ology’, or the study of the study of things, be called -ologyology?

“-ology
word-forming element indicating “branch of knowledge, science,” now the usual form of -logy. Originally used c. 1800 in nonce formations (commonsensology, etc.)…

martyrology (n.)
1590s, a native formation from martyr (n.) + -ology….

ichthyology (n.)
1640s,

Modern Latin, from Greek ikhthys “fish” + -ology.”

Etymology is one of the foundations for understanding how subjective relationships work. The source of etymology, unless otherwise noted is always Etymonline.com.

All Egyptian language references come from “An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary” by Wallace Budge c.1920

Here the concept of a collective consciousness is being examined. Any thought that exists in large numbers of minds falls within the lines of collective consciousness.
Therefore, in this work variances, typos/errors, rumors and lies are all relevant parts of the puzzle we will be examining.

In order to understand the fish symbol, One must first understand where it originates. The root of the Ichthys is in The Vesica Pisces, and the astrological sign of Pisces rules the feet. Consequently it is a logical place to start, at the foot, as the Vesica Pisces serves as an introduction to ICHTHYOS.