S3: What you (B..) miss is that the story of the Virgin Birth is simply one of
a series of miraculous births that crop up in other myths across cultures.
Including, among many, King Janaka (of Upanishadic and Ashtavakara Gita
fame), when conducting a yagya in a field hears a voice from the sky -- and
expressed a desire for child -- and upon finding a child in a furrow, the voice
says the infant is a spiritual child, Sita (destined to be Rama's wife and whom
some view as the counter part to Rama as Shakti is to Shiva, the energy of the
manifest universe).
S3: It's the deeper message they carry that is powerful as it activates levels
of the self not touched by a merely fictional character.
While sympathetic and at time sharing a similar view, by what
epistemolgical means do you (does one have to) begin to valid such a view?
Jung and Campbell (sacred cows?) may have had a field day milking that theme,
but is it simple mythical milk from cows such as Kamadhenu the mother of all
cows, who provides its owner whatever is desired, or Audhumbla norse cow who
licked a melting block of ice at the beginning of time and caused a man to
appear? .
S3: (I can't tell you exactly what the deep message is. Why? Because if it
could be expressed in prosaic language we wouldn't need to bother with myths!)
Similar can occur with listening to "sacred" music / chants from
traditional (long surviving) cultures. it can induce some "insight" hard(er) to
express, but yet seemingly inducing some new insights, perhaps new synaptic
connections or at least inner spark (or light bulb in head metaphor). What is
the validity of such insights? Back to the cows above. However, if listening to
such myths or rhythms /sounds (or seeing forms and colors in art) indeed do
(supposition, but it feels like that is happening) induce new synapses (or
lowers activation potential of existing synapses and enables more enduring,
longer, more sophisticated connections in the brain) then that may be
sufficient reward / justification for indulging MMA (see below).
That is, the myths, sounds, art (mythical, mystical arts ("MMA") ), may
structure "a new (or age old, yet currently untapped potential) style of
functioning of the nervous system" (jeez did I actually say that out loud).
Daniel Kaneman (Nobel Prize winner (economics) for work in cognitive sciences)
argues, “intuition is [pattern] recognition.” Might MMA help structure a style
of functioning that increases recognition of deeper levels of patterns in
nature / life / consciousness?
Turq: "I had forgotten how attached people can get to their fictional
characters.":
S3: That's cute coming from a dedicated fan of Sherlock!
S3: Why such stories are so appealing (to most of us, if not for others such
as yourself) is an intriguing question.
Perhaps the attachment comes from those characters reflecting some
strands of MMA that induce some amount of familiarity or recognition of deeper
patterns in human nature.
Turq: "I should probably consider myself lucky that you didn't consider my
presentation of an alternative Santa Claus":
S3: Well, Santa is a bit of a bore - unless you're 5 years old (and even
then).
Yet Santa is also a mythical beast -- with long standing stand-ins across
many cultures.
S3: But these characters of myth are not *fictional* characters. Indeed in the
case of those like Mary and Jesus they are real people whose life stories have
been submerged under a mythology.
Are you suggesting all characters in myths (must definitionally) have a
basis as actual historical people? I doubt it (though its interesting, for 5
seconds, to contemplate such). If not, what is the import of Jesus and Mary
having or not having a historical basis (there are interesting counter
arguments, such as the lack of any / much observations of a Jesus/Mary in
contemporaries during their "lives" at temporary).
S3: The difference? Myths emerge from the "collective unconscious" (whatever
that means!) whereas fiction is a conscious creation. As an example,
traditional fairy stories can carry some of the disturbing other-worldliness of
myth;
Raw, original fairy tales can be (are) holy shit scary. And this is good
for kids? I am not arguing pro or con, but it is a bit surprising that scaring
the holy crap out of kids is a road towards greater mental (or spiritual,
mystical) integration.
S3: The point of my original response is that to reduce that appeal to a
rape-narrative, as your linked article did, is just the kind of move that makes
me despair of all kinds of reductionism,
Yet male dominance female subservience is a dominant (but not universal)
theme in many traditional cultures -- and it has a fairly strong grasp (and
strangle) to the present in many cultures. The World Before Her, and related
videos were eye opening to me (not so much "I had no idea" but rather they give
some form and substance to what I may have suspected but have not swelled on
much)
.
Fairfield Life
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/408114
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/408114
Fairfield Life
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/408114
Fairfield Life focuses on topics of interest to seekers (and finders) of truth
and liberation everywhere. Fairfield, Iowa is home to Maharishi University of
Mana...
View on groups.yahoo.com
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/408114
Preview by Yahoo
S3: and is no doubt why I'm more drawn to idealist (mind-dependent)
philosophies than to materialist ones. I'm "top-down" rather than "bottom-up"
as they say. Even if I turn out to be wrong about that at least, like Oscar
Wilde, while I've been lying in the gutter I've also been looking at the stars.
