Israel, Greek and connection to Rig Vedam from west concept
KR In deivathin kural I read Maha Periyava proving to some Israelites
that their Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible) Judaism’s foundational text. (The word
“Tanakh” is an acronym of its three parts: Torah (The Five Books of Moses),
Nevi’im (Prophets), and Ketuvim (Writings)), is same as Rig Vedam in sound
and meaning conformity, revealing that Rig vedam was found throughout
followed by all communities of the world, and showing that the Vedam is
universal. Then started the analysis and found a few books of the western,
Greek authors who in 1800 and 1900 wrote the comparison. Unfortunately,
neither Sri Ganapathy nor Kanchi mutt people could exactly identify that
verse till date K Rajaram IRS 8724
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Patroklos, Concepts of Afterlife, and the Indic Triple Fire (pithruloka is
written that way)
The rituals occasioned by the Funeral of Patroklos, as narrated in
Iliad XXIII, have been compared with the royal funerary rituals of the
Hittites. The parallelisms in details and in ideology suggest a common
Indo-European heritage, in view of additional comparative evidence
available from the Indic traditions. If indeed the Funeral of Patroklos
reflects an ideology so early as to be of Indo-European heritage, then a
basic criterion for the dating of narrative traditions in the Homeric poems
has to be revised. Archaeologists tend to interpret the cremation of
Patroklos in particular and of Homeric heroes in general as inspired by
practices that went into effect only in the first millennium B.C., when
cremation and inhumation are found to exist side by side; in this respect,
then, Homeric poetry is supposed to reflect a near-contemporary state of
affairs, as opposed to a more archaic heritage dating back to the *Mycenaean
era* of the second millennium B.C., a period when cremation is sporadic and
inhumation is the norm. *** The comparative evidence, on the other hand,
now suggests that the procedures and ideologies of cremation as attested in
Homeric poetry are in fact so archaic as to predate the second millennium
B.C., thus reflecting—albeit distantly—customs that go back to a time *even
before the entry into Greece, @@@ *in the beginning of the second
millennium, of the Indo-European language that ultimately became the Greek
language. Even more important for my purposes, the comparative evidence
also suggests that the cremation of Patroklos is a traditional theme
founded upon concepts of afterlife beyond Hades.
[*** inhumation means burial. Though there is ongoing debate regarding the
reliability of the dating method, some scholars believe the earliest human
burial dates back 100,000 years. Archaeological expeditions have discovered
human skeletal remains stained with red ochre in the Skhul cave at Qafzeh
in Israel. A variety of grave goods were present at the site, including the
mandible of a wild boar in the arms of one of the skeletons The remains of
a 3-year-old child at Panga ya Saidi cave in Kenya dating to 78,000 years
ago also show signs suggestive of a burial, such as the digging of a pit,
laying of the body in a foetal position and intentional rapid covering of
the corpse .In ancient Egypt, burial customs developed during the
Predynastic period. Round graves with one pot were used in the Badarian
Period (4400–3800 B.C.E.), continuing the tradition of Omari and Maadi
cultures]
@@@ cremation in Greece in the Mycenean war is defeating the residents
and starting the Greeks; Mr Poecocke in Greece says that after the
Mahabharatha war remained soldiers departed to west by sea and some
occupied the eastern part of Greece; they named the places as in India then
{as UK named places in USA}; the Mahabharatham after the war as well as
during the 18 days war speaks about the cremation 3112 BCE ; and they
should have continued in Greece the cremation; and after 1500 years when
that war broke out (read Greek history) Homer had recorded which is now
claimed as 2000 BCE the cremation part; later Greece followed the
inhumation style]
For the moment, I (the west author) chose the word “afterlife”
instead of “rebirth” or “eschatology.” These other words too are pertinent
to my inquiry: as we shall see in what follows, the Indo-European
languages, Greek included, abound with earlier patterns of thought
concerning life after death. Still, it is useful to start with the most
general term possible.
The concept of afterlife, as I argue, is implicit in the Homeric
narrative of the cremation of Patroklos. Comparable concepts, as we shall
see, are explicitly attested in Indic institutions, especially as
represented in prayers to the god Savitr̥ and in rituals involving the
so-called Triple Fire. After a detailed exposition of the Indic evidence,
soon to follow, we shall also see that closely analogous concepts are
represented—albeit indirectly—in the Greek evidence, specifically in the
diction of Homeric poetry. {KR I used to write that the vedic cult spread
through Greece and went to Israel then to Europe et ; and it was wrong for
the west to turned the table as INDO-EUROPEAN whereas indo was the route
for the Europeans}
In correlating various concepts of afterlife with the practice of
cremation, I am not about to claim that cremation was the definitive
Indo-European funerary ritual. I argue only that cremation was clearly one
of perhaps several different types of Indo-European funerary ritual. In any
discussion of differences in funerary practices, as in the case of
cremation and inhumation, I wish to stress from the start that no
universals can be assumed for the thought-patterns—let us continue to call
them ideologies—traditionally associated with such practices. {KR Kindly
vide how the west do resist that yes entered from India inly} The ritual
dimensions of cremation and inhumation may “mean” different things in
different societies or in different phases of the same society. Where the
two practices coexist in one society, they may conceivably convey two
distinct meanings. In other situations, coexistence may reflect a blurring
of distinctions. In some contexts, a practice like inhumation may not even
imply anything about a given society’s concepts of afterlife. In other
contexts, however, there is good reason to think that the same practice of
inhumation does indeed imply the concept of rebirth. To take the stance of
doubting in general the presence of such an ideology, on the grounds that
“a simple inhumation without the accompanying idea of rebirth is often
found,” seems to me unjustified.
* Let us begin with the briefest possible summary of the evidence from
the Indic Vedas, representing the oldest attested Indic concepts of
afterlife.* Before death the realm of consciousness, of both rational and
emotional functions, is the mánas-.{ here KR manas is meant as Mind and not
heart} When death occurs, this mánas- is separated from the body, and in
the process of this separation mánas- can be either equated or paired with
the word ásu-. After death, mánas- and ásu– designate the disembodied
conveyor of the dead person’s identity, sometimes represented as a frail
and vulnerable homunculus who is a miniature vision of the deceased as he
seemed in life. {KR we say sukshma sareeram} Eventually, mánas– and/or
ásu–{KR asu in hindi is tears} arrive at the “third sky,” where the
pitŕ̥̥-s ‘ancestors’ abide. The mánas- and/or ásu– are destined to be
reintegrated with the body, and cremation of the body is the key to this
eventual reintegration.
From a preliminary comparison with the archaic Greek evidence, we see
some striking convergences and divergences. Before death the realm of
consciousness, of rational and emotional functions, is the *thūmós,* which
can be paired in this context with the word ménos. When death occurs, the
thūmós is separated from the body, and in the process of this separation thūmós
can be paired with the words ménos or psūkhḗ. After death, psūkhḗ
designates the disembodied conveyor of the dead person’s identity,
sometimes represented as a homunculus who is a miniature vision of the
deceased as he seemed in life. I should stress that the psūkhḗ is merely a
conveyor of identity, not the identity itself: in Homeric diction, the
word autós
‘self’ actually designates the body, which the psūkhḗ leaves behind when
the hero dies (e.g. Iliad I 3-4).
Before death, the word psūkhḗ is as a rule excluded from designating
the realm of consciousness, of rational and emotional functions; after
death, the words thūmós and ménos are as a rule excluded from designating
the disembodied conveyor of the dead person’s identity. Only in the process
of death can all three words thūmós/ménos/psūkhḗ be fully synonymous as
they are separated from the body, they head for Hades. (KR The underworld)
In some Homeric variations, however, arrival at Hades may be
delayed. For example, after the psūkhḗ of Patroklos has been separated from
his body by death (Iliad XVI 856), it leaves for Hades (XVI 856), but is
thwarted from entering (XXIII 72-74); in a vision (XXIII 65ff.) the psūkhḗ
of Patroklos asks Achilles to give his body a funeral in general (XXIII 71)
and a cremation in particular (XXIII 76), so that his psūkhḗ may finally
enter Hades (XXIII 71, 75-76). Achilles is astounded that the psūkhḗ of
Patroklos has phrénes (XXIII 103-104). We must note that this word phrénes
designates the physical localization of thūmós and ménos in the living.
Indeed, what the psūkhḗ of Patroklos says to Achilles in Iliad XXIII 65-92
are the words of one who appears to be conscious of himself, in possession
of his rational and emotional faculties. By implication, the psūkhḗ of
Patroklos can become detached or distinct from his thūmós/ménos and become
free to enter Hades only after his body is cremated.; On the surface, then,
it seems as if the Homeric poems point to Hades as the ultimate destination
of the psūkhḗ. Moreover, once the process of cremation enables the psūkhḗ
to arrive at Hades, it is liable to lose consciousness as well as rational
and emotional faculties, and we are left with the initial impression that
the dead person stays dead forever. Here we see a major divergence from the
Indic formulation, where the mánas– and/or ásu- not only preserve
consciousness and the faculties but also become eventually reintegrated
with the body by way of cremation. Yet the divergence lies not in what the
Greek formulation says about the afterlife but rather in what it leaves
unsaid. Let us keep in mind that, conscious or unconscious, the psūkhḗ is a
conveyor of identity.
Thus, the door is still left open for the possibility that the psūkhḗ
may yet be reintegrated with the body. A word like thūmós or like ménos may
at first seem from our point of view more appropriate for designating the
aspect that is separated and then hypothetically reintegrated with the
body, since both thūmós and ménos designate consciousness and the
faculties. In fact, as we have just noted, thūmós and ménos are synonymous
with psūkhḗ at the moment of death. Yet these very words thūmós and ménos
cease to apply to the identity once it passes through the gates of Hades;
from here on, the identity is conveyed by psūkhḗ only. This suspension of
synonymity is itself telling us something: that the psūkhḗ once had an
affinity with consciousness and the faculties—an affinity which is then
suspended in Hades. K Rajaram IRS 8724 Part 1
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZorU6CYegR%3DwxjZ8vu5aZzF8cj0RMR9GuzekxHPagA0%3D%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com.
