Uhh, I have theories, that sound so freaking far fetched, that you'd have trouble seeing me as a sane or credible person, however, I can mostly account for a sound basis for why I believe that theory, but it kind of goes beyond all our current ideas of western science, philosophy, history and the world..! I wish my writing ability had not decreased, I've tried to articulate them on the blog, but they always turn out sounding so bad..!
Anyway, let's choose a starting point.
Modern society or the current form of civilization or modern history as they call it, according to the world, is about 6000 years old. i.e. we believe that civilization among humans started to happen at max about 6000 years ago.
Mesopotamia is about 3100 BC, Mohan jodaro is about 2500 BC as is harappa, about 2600 BC.
Humans in the current evolved form as homo sapiens have existed on the planet Earth for about 200,000 years. and when I talk about the sapiens, I'm not even talking about homo neanderthals or some of the more monkey like species of humans. This means that for about 196,000 years of existing as a species, there was no civilization in society.
On the home front, when you read about the harappa and mohenjodaro civilizations, and even well into the mughal era you'll learn about Gurukul, schools that were incredibly famous. Famous enough to attract students from all over the world (much like the US education system), and while I can't place the source, there is a record of a British officer burning down this library, I can't recall which one, his words were "All the information written in these books is worth less than the paper of a single book of british libraries" or something to that effect. The Nalanda library in Bihar was world renowned and was burned by the Turks, and it burned for 3 months. Continuously.
The reason I speak of these things, is to kind of convey to you the sheer immensity of civilization and intellect of our history. Today if you visit the Ajanta and Ellora Caves, they are dated at about 400 BCE, and they already consist of a completely modern society.
These societies, built medicine in the form of Ayurveda, Good health in the form of Yoga, both revolutionary discoveries of science, however, imho, there was a fundamental difference in the way they arrived at their science.
The difference is of the nature of study. While our era is a product of the experimental kind of study; Theirs was more of a conceptualization through observation, comprehension approach.
Now, I know I sound like I'm venturing into mysticism, but I'll make some weak arguments first, which can be brushed aside by not believing in them, and saying I'm talking trash, but I'll also follow them up with stronger arguments which I think validate the possibility of the weak arguments being true.
Yoga to my mind is almost the opposite of where you'd reach if you were trying to make your body stronger. Intuitively, if I wanna increase my body strength, I would work on the muscle I wanna improve, and I would work on it persistently and fast. To improve my digestion or my concentration, I would NOT sit in a place or position breathing deeply and slowly, and moving all parts of my body very slowly, for the most part. I would not call my nostrils, the sun and the moon, and try to control my breathing in order to fix my body. This I believe is one of the sciences that were so to speak discovered, by method of purely mental conceptualization.
And while that might sound strangely far fetched, there has been one person in recent history who has worked purely by this method. Nikola Tesla.
Tesla's list of accomplishments is massive. But there's a big list of things which hebelieved knew were true, but never managed to complete. While radio was a smaller form of passing information through the air (By tuning, the sender and receiver to the same frequencies), he also believed it was possible to transmit electricity, not just signals, but with all of it's power to drive gadgets to devices without any wires whatsoever (i.e. completely wireless electricity). Other things he believed were possible included, not just passing electricity, but also intelligent information mentally (Telepathy in short). He frequently claims to have been in tune with the cosmos, and actually had the premonition of his mother's death. (He woke up after a dream of hers, and was convinced that she was dead), these are the words from one of his poems:
Those are just some of the lines. He's basically talking about the nuclear Bombs about to be used. The poem later on mentions Einstein by name, and talks about his theories. Tesla was not a part of the nuclear weapons program. He is the pioneer of some of the most advanced technologies we use in the modern world, all the way down to AC current.
Tesla was also fascinated and influenced by Swami Vivekananda. Infact Tesla uses the terms Prana as life force and Akash as some kind of ether in some of his work. I read that, Swami Vivekananda and Tesla had had a conversation where Tesla had mentioned that he could derive the mathematical equation between mass and energy, and Swami Vivekananda had been keen on that, as he believed that such a relation between the two would help to converge Eastern and Western philosophies related to science. Tesla wasn't able to do that back then, however Einstein did it about 10 years later.
All of this Tesla rant is to convey the idea that there is at the very least the possibility that there exists such a thing as mental tuning that yields very very real results, and is as much of a scientific method, as experimentation.
Another set of ideas that seems to be common across many old civilizations is the idea of a yuga cycle. It's there in the Mayan history as well, and it consists of 4 basic phases. The Golden Age (Sattyuga), the Silver Age (Trethayuga), the Bronze Age (Dwaparayuga) and the Iron Age (Kalyuga). The yuga cycle is approximately a 12,000 x 2 year cycle. One half cycle consists of the descension, where the world goes from Golden>Silver>Bronze>Iron, and then from Iron>Bronze>Silver>Golden.
Our "Mythologies" (ironically coming from the word myth rooted in mithya - meaning subjective truth/ illusion) have various events that are set in the above ages. There are many versions of how long each phase lasts, the one I follow was an elaborate theory that disproves every other version, through various references, and says that each phase is about 3000 years long. Krishna's Mahabharat is set to have taken place in the Dwapara (Bronze) yuga. The interesting bit is, that the city of Dwaraka has been discovered submerged under water (as described in the story) near the gulf of Kutch. By my calculations it had to be about 9000 years old. Apparently there's a dispute on the age of the city, where many western scientists peg it at about 6000, but the more scientifically accurate estimates say it had to be a city at least 9000 years old. And since a fully civilized society with tools, clothing and structures was about 9000 years old, it's reasonable to assume that civilization as a process would have begun much further back.
This takes me to one of the numbers I mentioned way back, 196,000 years, before the current situation. I feel almost certain, that there's a number of civilizations of humanity that have existed before our current memory of 6000 years.
Now the topic I started this whole rant for, the religions, and why I believe that all of them are not the same.
Hinduism does not have a founder. Because it was never intended to be an -ism. The name of the religion itself comes from the river Indus, meaning it was a word for the people of a certain region. In fact the very word Dharma which has come to mean religion, is actually also the word for duty.
What we have left today in India barely manages to be Hinduism, because apart from being non-violent and not focused on conversion, here's how liberally they saw the whole idea of sex:
Not only was the Kama Sutra, a guide to pleasurable sex written in our land, but the symbol for the shiva lingam, consists of 2 parts; Shiva and Parvathi, where the top is Shiva's phallus, and the Bottom is Parvathi's yonic (interestingly that's also a sanskrit word), and the symbol by itself describes the act of creation of the universe, after all, all life in the world is created by that. Moreover, the stories have been inclusive of all LGBT or fluid genders (Mahabharat greatly), and the Gita does not even talk about sex.
While I have written about what Hinduism is in contrast to the other religions here, there is a very basic difference between this and the Abrahmic religions (Islam, Christianity and Judaism).
Going through the holy books of those religions, I found, that there was a great emphasis on the spread of the religion, i.e. it was very important for other men to believe what they believed, and if they didn't God was automatically anti them, either destroying their lives, villages, family Himself, or beckoning all real Christians/Muslims to do so. Violence as a way to spread belief was not only acceptable but promoted. There are verses where God annihilates anything that mildly offensive to him. There is also a direct need to kill anytime two men lay together.
This is starkly different from Hinduism, where in the Gita, the intensity of the negative is much much less. There are fools that deserve bad, but their bad is limited to being stuck in the loop of birth and death more than anything else.
Secondly, the Abrahmic religions are more of a to-do and not to-do list, whereas the Gita is more intent on trying to convey an understanding of how things work, not with long speeches of if you do this, I, God will do that; the Gita tries to give higher importance not on the deeds alone, but also on the mindset or intent of the deeds, idealizing detachment and the greater good far more. Something that isn't really there in the other holy books.
That said, I did find a parallel between the Quran, the Bible, and maybe the Mahabharat where there is more violence, including Krishna doing some unnecessary amount of it, but here's the kicker, Krishna the God pays for his sins at the end of the book, by receiving a curse from the mortal, the Kauravas' Mother, and THAT signifies, that even God isn't above his own laws, which is a completely opposite ideology to the other religions, where God is above any kind of doubt.
Of course, I view Buddhism and Jainism, to be more of branches of Hinduism, just as Christianity, Judaism and Islam are tightly wound together. (Jesus, and Moses are prophets of Islam as well) There's a fundamental difference between the Eastern and Western religions.
The fact that I'm born Hindu completely takes away from my credibility of pointing out these differences, but I met some ex-Christians and ex-Muslims online who basically voiced the same sentiment, and had higher respect for Buddhism and the likes.
But yea, that's why I believe, all religions are the same is, but a diplomatic statement, at best, and a complete lie at worse.
Anyway, let's choose a starting point.
Modern society or the current form of civilization or modern history as they call it, according to the world, is about 6000 years old. i.e. we believe that civilization among humans started to happen at max about 6000 years ago.
Mesopotamia is about 3100 BC, Mohan jodaro is about 2500 BC as is harappa, about 2600 BC.
Humans in the current evolved form as homo sapiens have existed on the planet Earth for about 200,000 years. and when I talk about the sapiens, I'm not even talking about homo neanderthals or some of the more monkey like species of humans. This means that for about 196,000 years of existing as a species, there was no civilization in society.
On the home front, when you read about the harappa and mohenjodaro civilizations, and even well into the mughal era you'll learn about Gurukul, schools that were incredibly famous. Famous enough to attract students from all over the world (much like the US education system), and while I can't place the source, there is a record of a British officer burning down this library, I can't recall which one, his words were "All the information written in these books is worth less than the paper of a single book of british libraries" or something to that effect. The Nalanda library in Bihar was world renowned and was burned by the Turks, and it burned for 3 months. Continuously.
The reason I speak of these things, is to kind of convey to you the sheer immensity of civilization and intellect of our history. Today if you visit the Ajanta and Ellora Caves, they are dated at about 400 BCE, and they already consist of a completely modern society.
These societies, built medicine in the form of Ayurveda, Good health in the form of Yoga, both revolutionary discoveries of science, however, imho, there was a fundamental difference in the way they arrived at their science.
The difference is of the nature of study. While our era is a product of the experimental kind of study; Theirs was more of a conceptualization through observation, comprehension approach.
Now, I know I sound like I'm venturing into mysticism, but I'll make some weak arguments first, which can be brushed aside by not believing in them, and saying I'm talking trash, but I'll also follow them up with stronger arguments which I think validate the possibility of the weak arguments being true.
Yoga to my mind is almost the opposite of where you'd reach if you were trying to make your body stronger. Intuitively, if I wanna increase my body strength, I would work on the muscle I wanna improve, and I would work on it persistently and fast. To improve my digestion or my concentration, I would NOT sit in a place or position breathing deeply and slowly, and moving all parts of my body very slowly, for the most part. I would not call my nostrils, the sun and the moon, and try to control my breathing in order to fix my body. This I believe is one of the sciences that were so to speak discovered, by method of purely mental conceptualization.
And while that might sound strangely far fetched, there has been one person in recent history who has worked purely by this method. Nikola Tesla.
The two intensifying and amplifying apparatuses are not yet in existence but he displayed the most perfect confidence that when they are, they will work as he expects them to do.Nikola Tesla is quite well known to have built machines purely after mental conceptualizations. It's one of the reasons that some of his inventions are still mysterious to us today because, there were no blue prints. In fact I have read an interview of his where he claims that, "there's a big ball of all knowledge, and all I do is simply connect to it for information". He had towards the latter half of his life, a major obsession with frequencies. One of his experiments consists of a small oscillator he had built, which I believe was small enough to be placed on a table, but it was tuned to a very specific frequency; the resonance frequency of his building; which led to his building shaking and stirring, leading to the cops reaching his place, as he used a sledge-hammer to destroy it.
"These effects,. he said, "are of the kind that can be calculated with the most positive accuracy. Like many other things I have done they require no previous experiment once they are properly conceived. There are a few details to be finished - my calculation might be perhaps 10 per cent off at present - and then the whole thing will be presented to the world. It has always been my practice to give the world a sort of preview of what I am doing so that a reception is prepared."
"I should also say, and this is perhaps as important as anything else about it, that in this apparatus all limitations as to electric force and the quantity of electricity transmitted have been removed."
Tesla's list of accomplishments is massive. But there's a big list of things which he
While listening on my cosmic phone
I caught words from the Olympus blown.
The latest tells of a cosmic gun.
To be pelted is very poor fun.
Those are just some of the lines. He's basically talking about the nuclear Bombs about to be used. The poem later on mentions Einstein by name, and talks about his theories. Tesla was not a part of the nuclear weapons program. He is the pioneer of some of the most advanced technologies we use in the modern world, all the way down to AC current.
Tesla was also fascinated and influenced by Swami Vivekananda. Infact Tesla uses the terms Prana as life force and Akash as some kind of ether in some of his work. I read that, Swami Vivekananda and Tesla had had a conversation where Tesla had mentioned that he could derive the mathematical equation between mass and energy, and Swami Vivekananda had been keen on that, as he believed that such a relation between the two would help to converge Eastern and Western philosophies related to science. Tesla wasn't able to do that back then, however Einstein did it about 10 years later.
All of this Tesla rant is to convey the idea that there is at the very least the possibility that there exists such a thing as mental tuning that yields very very real results, and is as much of a scientific method, as experimentation.
Another set of ideas that seems to be common across many old civilizations is the idea of a yuga cycle. It's there in the Mayan history as well, and it consists of 4 basic phases. The Golden Age (Sattyuga), the Silver Age (Trethayuga), the Bronze Age (Dwaparayuga) and the Iron Age (Kalyuga). The yuga cycle is approximately a 12,000 x 2 year cycle. One half cycle consists of the descension, where the world goes from Golden>Silver>Bronze>Iron, and then from Iron>Bronze>Silver>Golden.
Our "Mythologies" (ironically coming from the word myth rooted in mithya - meaning subjective truth/ illusion) have various events that are set in the above ages. There are many versions of how long each phase lasts, the one I follow was an elaborate theory that disproves every other version, through various references, and says that each phase is about 3000 years long. Krishna's Mahabharat is set to have taken place in the Dwapara (Bronze) yuga. The interesting bit is, that the city of Dwaraka has been discovered submerged under water (as described in the story) near the gulf of Kutch. By my calculations it had to be about 9000 years old. Apparently there's a dispute on the age of the city, where many western scientists peg it at about 6000, but the more scientifically accurate estimates say it had to be a city at least 9000 years old. And since a fully civilized society with tools, clothing and structures was about 9000 years old, it's reasonable to assume that civilization as a process would have begun much further back.
This takes me to one of the numbers I mentioned way back, 196,000 years, before the current situation. I feel almost certain, that there's a number of civilizations of humanity that have existed before our current memory of 6000 years.
Now the topic I started this whole rant for, the religions, and why I believe that all of them are not the same.
Hinduism does not have a founder. Because it was never intended to be an -ism. The name of the religion itself comes from the river Indus, meaning it was a word for the people of a certain region. In fact the very word Dharma which has come to mean religion, is actually also the word for duty.
What we have left today in India barely manages to be Hinduism, because apart from being non-violent and not focused on conversion, here's how liberally they saw the whole idea of sex:
Not only was the Kama Sutra, a guide to pleasurable sex written in our land, but the symbol for the shiva lingam, consists of 2 parts; Shiva and Parvathi, where the top is Shiva's phallus, and the Bottom is Parvathi's yonic (interestingly that's also a sanskrit word), and the symbol by itself describes the act of creation of the universe, after all, all life in the world is created by that. Moreover, the stories have been inclusive of all LGBT or fluid genders (Mahabharat greatly), and the Gita does not even talk about sex.
While I have written about what Hinduism is in contrast to the other religions here, there is a very basic difference between this and the Abrahmic religions (Islam, Christianity and Judaism).
Going through the holy books of those religions, I found, that there was a great emphasis on the spread of the religion, i.e. it was very important for other men to believe what they believed, and if they didn't God was automatically anti them, either destroying their lives, villages, family Himself, or beckoning all real Christians/Muslims to do so. Violence as a way to spread belief was not only acceptable but promoted. There are verses where God annihilates anything that mildly offensive to him. There is also a direct need to kill anytime two men lay together.
This is starkly different from Hinduism, where in the Gita, the intensity of the negative is much much less. There are fools that deserve bad, but their bad is limited to being stuck in the loop of birth and death more than anything else.
Secondly, the Abrahmic religions are more of a to-do and not to-do list, whereas the Gita is more intent on trying to convey an understanding of how things work, not with long speeches of if you do this, I, God will do that; the Gita tries to give higher importance not on the deeds alone, but also on the mindset or intent of the deeds, idealizing detachment and the greater good far more. Something that isn't really there in the other holy books.
That said, I did find a parallel between the Quran, the Bible, and maybe the Mahabharat where there is more violence, including Krishna doing some unnecessary amount of it, but here's the kicker, Krishna the God pays for his sins at the end of the book, by receiving a curse from the mortal, the Kauravas' Mother, and THAT signifies, that even God isn't above his own laws, which is a completely opposite ideology to the other religions, where God is above any kind of doubt.
Of course, I view Buddhism and Jainism, to be more of branches of Hinduism, just as Christianity, Judaism and Islam are tightly wound together. (Jesus, and Moses are prophets of Islam as well) There's a fundamental difference between the Eastern and Western religions.
The fact that I'm born Hindu completely takes away from my credibility of pointing out these differences, but I met some ex-Christians and ex-Muslims online who basically voiced the same sentiment, and had higher respect for Buddhism and the likes.
But yea, that's why I believe, all religions are the same is, but a diplomatic statement, at best, and a complete lie at worse.
Comments
You should. It's food for the soul.
The Gita though, I have read completely, and I can vouch for what's not in it as well.