Why Are The Priests Bald?

Why did the priests all around the world shave their hair and what was the idea of it? Have you ever thought over this question?
Whenever mentioning a man who demonstrated his high mental abilities we even now often use the expression " a lucid head, bright mind". Why a "lucid head"? Why not just a "smart head"?
Why do we call an educated and intelligent man "enlightened”?
The identification of all reasonable with the light occurred so long ago that we struggle to grasp even the meaning of the question raised.

1. Egyptian priest.30 dynasty.approx.350 BC (Germany. Berlin Egyptian Museum.)

2. Sumerian priest. III dynasty of Ur. 2100-1900 BC (Iraq)

In fact, everything has a starting point and without a philosophical contemplation of the surrounding world such identifications are simply impossible because there's no reason to link anything with anything to associate, to identify, to draw parallels. Here comes a mammoth and it is easy just to kill and eat it without much thought, identifications and parallels.
Thus, when we say that the identification happened long time ago we are talking in the context of the history of philosophical school development.
It should be noted that as in any other field of science the mankind has huge gaps in the History of Philosophy .
In various textbooks and encyclopedias you can read mind-blowing texts about this as follows: "the origin of philosophy, the formation of rational philosophical thinking began almost at the same time in VII—VI centuries BC at different ends of the globe: China, India and the Mediterranean Greek colonies."


You may think that this coverage of the question is peculiar to only Wikipedia, but it's not true. Sources with large claims are sometimes able to shower us with myriads of alogisms. For example, in published in 1995 by a group of authors of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences book "the History of Philosophy in brief" we can read the lines of the following content:

"The earliest written monuments of the middle Eastern regions do not obviously represent a holistic philosophical systems with a precise conceptual apparatus. They do not reflect the problems of being and existence (ontology), there is no clarity in the question of a human being ability to know the world (epistemology). That stage of the development only the ancient thinkers were able to reach who stand at the beginning of the tradition of European philosophical thinking..."

It is a concept after all. Czech academics were not able to find in the ancient written monuments even a hint of a holistic philosophical system as if ancient people just used to practice philosophical thinking but failed to reach the consistency . However, in this case, it is unclear why after all these it is written:

The development of antique Greek philosophy and all further related traditions would not have been fully understood and explained without the heritage of thought knowledge of the Middle East ancient civilizations which had a significant impact on Greek culture in its most ancient layers. However, a systematic study of Middle East civilizations is relatively young and is hardly more than a hundred years.".

So in fact this means that there is no reliable data on the philosophy of the Middle East but then in this case why did they state that the philosophy of the Middle East was deprived of something?

If the "systematic study” of the Middle East civilizations is relatively young" which definitely means both the lack of sources and knowledge about the philosophy of the Middle East what made them think that "written monuments of the Middle East regions do not obviously represent holistic philosophical systems?”. What did they base on particularly coming to a conclusion that to the integrity level of philosophical systems " only antique thinkers came..."?

The lack of knowledge about the philosophy of the Middle East does not certainly give us any right to speak about the existence of a holistic philosophical systems in the middle East but on the other hand can not prove the fact that the philosophy as a science had become systematic in Greece

Absence itself, by its nature is not something to prove or disprove. If you have not met the girl it does not indicate her absence in nature but at the same time it does not prove her existence until you meet her.

The identification of the mind and light, of course, cannot be related as a trace of a philosophical system existence. Surely, this idea could easily have arisen in a common beholder’s mind who after having tasted the roast meat of a mammoth killed by him at the beginning of this article, lied down at the entrance of his cave and started meditating…

However, if we see that the same philosophical idea, the identification is deliberately embedded in the language we are obliged to assert the existence of complex systems in the philosophical perception of the world and therefore to speak about the existence of strong philosophical schools.

I know how unbelievable looks `what I said in the last paragraph, however I would ask you to be patient and grasp the essence of what was said. To make it easier to understand what I mean about embedding of philosophical ideas into the language we will return to the question why, after all, all priests are bald?”.

In the Armenian language one of the words having a value of "bald" is pronounced as kunt (կունտ)[1] or kund (կունդ)[2] where kndel (կնդել) "to shear, shave"[3].

This word as we see is consonant with Armenian gund (գունդ) that has the value of "ball, spherical body". But not everybody knows that in early medieval manuscripts, for example in the works of Anania Shirakatsi, Parpetsi as well as in unmarked translations of both Plato’s and Aristotle’s works the word gund (գունդ) often in the form of gunt (gunt), expresses the value of "solar or lunar disk". And in the first Armenian translation of the Bible, e.g. in the Book of Daniel or in the Prophecy of Zechariah this word means "rounded part of the lamp" but in the book "The Life and Martyrdom of the Saints" (Վարք և վկայաբանութիւնք սրբոց. 2 Tom. Venice,1874), the same word is used to mean a "human head".

I am sure that for many of you it has already become clear that all these kunt, kund, gunt, the gund in the values of "bold", "the solar or lunar disk, the round part of a lamp", "human head" are a part of the same philosophical chain, created and organized in the same philosophical school. This school was able and had a special right to incorporate philosophical concepts into the language itself.

Actually we now understand why the priests had their hair shaved off. A preist’s head implies a genius and at the same time implies a sun, a moon, a lamp and therefore is bald! The clue is inside the language – said and done!

And now, after all this, is there any doubt that the so-called proto-Slavic form for the word "bald" is actually a taking over from the Armenian lus, luys (light) which is seen in Czech-Slovak lysý 'bald'.

Arman Revazyan Ⓒ
Translation by Margarita Peretyatko 

------------------------------
1.Russian-Armenian dictionary. Yerevan, 1956.
2.Jaucian.G. Armenian etymological dictionary. Yerevan,2010.
3.Jaucian, as usual, is looking for a kund in the Iranian languages but finally is forced to write "A possible origin of some lost Iranian root which apparently could have come from Indo-European *(s)ken-d- "to tear, to declare". A brilliantly formed sentence structure! )))