--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Some esoteric writers have mentioned that the Atlanteans were > > > > related to the Egyptians. Thus, we see similar technologies, > > > > such as the pyramids in Egypt and in Meso-America (Mexico and > > > > Guatemala). As such, one can deduce that the Atlanteans may > > > > have come from India as well. Were they also driven out of > > > > India for their mismanagement? > > > > > > The truth is that both the Atlanteans and the > > > pre-Columbian civilizations of South America > > > were, in fact, from India. But they were not > > > "driven out of India for mismanagement." > > > > > > They left on their own, because they were tired > > > of Vedic high-pressure salesmen trying to badger > > > them into buying a "Vastu" house at 3-4 times > > > market value and trying to sell them yagyas that > > > didn't do a damned thing but make the priests > > > rich. So they moved to where none of these money- > > > grubbing assholes lived, and created their own > > > form of architecture to thumb their noses at > > > India and everything about it. > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > More seriously, temple ruins recently found and > > > carbon-dated in South America now predate all but > > > a handful of the oldest structures ever found in > > > India. Kinda makes Maharishi's claims about India > > > being the "home of all knowledge" sound like > > > nationalistic religious hokum, eh? > > > > One should not underestimate the wisdom that is contained > > in the vedic literature. > > Especially if you think the world revolves > around cows. :-) > > > Ancient buildings or ruins do not say much to me. > > It's more interesting to learn about their cosmology and > > beliefs for living life. > > Which you know about how? Isn't it because of > a magical mantra -- "Maharishisez?" > > > It's too bad we can never really know what the Mayans > > or the Aztecs knew since the Spaniards burned their > > books during their conquest. > > They didn't have books -- or paper -- as far > as I know, so that's not true. They used bark, > and many of those records *have* survived, pre- > served carefully by the very people you claim > burned them. From Wikipedia: > > Aztec culture and history is primarily known: > > * From archaeological evidence as it is found > in excavations such as that of the renowned Templo > Mayor in Mexico City and many others. > * From indigenous bark paper codices. > * From eyewitness accounts by Spanish conquistadors > such as Hernán Cortés and Bernal Díaz del Castillo. > * And especially from 16th and 17th century > descriptions of Aztec culture and history written > by Spanish clergymen and literate Aztecs in the > Spanish or Nahuatl language, such as the famous > Florentine Codex compiled by the Franciscan monk > Bernardino de Sahagún with the help of indigenous > Aztec informants. > > My point is simply that that is a FAR greater > "body of evidence" as to their beliefs and/or > practices than you can point to for the Vedas. > You have chosen to believe stories -- rather > glorified and unverifiable stories -- that were > told to you by people you consider "authorities." > It was an oral tradition, not written down until > long after the era was over. And as Stu suggests, > haven't you ever played "telephone?" Wouldn't > there be a natural tendency for priests whose > livelihood depended entirely on how entertain- > ingly they could tell stories would tend to > "enhance" those stories from time to time? > > The "Vedic culture" referred to by Maharishi, > and revered as truth by many TMers, is, as far > as I can tell, a myth. It might have happened as > they say, but then again it might not. Most of > the "knowledge" they seem to "find" in verses > about cows and green-flowing soma I see as being > projected there, by those who are looking to find > it. (Think an entire several-hours-long boring > lecture based on analyzing one word, and "finding" > in it things that may or may not be there. Sound > familiar?) In *exactly* the same way that people > project things onto the Bible, or the Koran, or > other writings that they hold to be "true." The > presumption of truth and the writings being somehow > special and a "doorway to knowledge" comes first; > the "discovery" of the "knowledge" comes later. > > > From what we've learned so far from the Spanish friars, > > the Mayans and Aztecs had very peculiar practices in > > their culture-- human sacrifices for appeasing the gods > > being one of them. > > Whereas the Vedic cultures tended to sacrifice > only horses? And the equality of human beings > on the altar of the caste system? > > It's OK to believe that the myth you believe in > was really "true." But you should probably have > some tolerance for those of us who look at it > as unproven myth. From that point of view, basing > one's life, spiritual practices, and lifestyle > on the supposed principles of Vedic culture makes > as much sense as basing one's life, spiritual > practices, and lifestyle on "The Lord of the > Rings." And let's face it...in Middle Earth they > didn't have a social system in which you could > aspire no higher than your parents did. If they > were "untouchables," so were you. Forever. And > all of your children and their children would > be, too. > > I'm with Stu and Curtis here. There seems to me > to be an overfondness on the part of some seekers > for "the wisdom of the ancients" that is as far > out of touch with reality as the overfondness of > American political conservatives for the 1950s. > > The latter long to "return" to that perfect era > of Ozzie and Harriet, *which never really existed* > except on TV, and in popular fiction. I'm suggest- > ing that the same nostalgia for "a time that > never was" may be in operation with the reverence > that some feel for Atlantis or Lemuria or, yes, > the Vedic era. They're projecting a perfection > onto a mythic era because they can't see that > same perfection in the world of Now. > > Now has *always* had its shiny sides and its dark > sides. It had them in the Vedic period and it has > them now. The issue now, as then, is what you > choose to focus on.
The wisdom from the Bible and vedic literature was derived through experience and introspection of their meaning. These writings record the understanding of the people at a certain time in history. These writings may not be entirely correct from our point of view and experience. For example, the Hebrews were also influenced by the idea of human sacrifices to appease the gods. This is the reason why we read that Abraham was about to kill his son to satisfy Yahweh. However, we read that something stopped him from doing so. IMO, it was his own conscience that told him this act was inhuman. >From our vantage point, these writings are not mere myth. But they are documentation of how a certain people grappled with what is right and wrong, or the truth. This is particularly applicable to the myth of the Garden of Eden. IMO, we should not disregard the message behind the story. As we have discussed in this forum, the Eden story has several meanings which are still applicable to our lives today. Further, the vedic literature is more interesting to me in that the stories are narrated in several medium of understanding. There is the literal translation, the symbolic meanings, and the sound content of them. Specifically, the stories include symbolic meanings that pertain to jyotish. Thus, we see a culture of writers who were attentive to communicating with the human brain in several phases. For these reasons, we should not underestimate the ancient writings which some people consider as mere myths.
