Our Aryan Heritage: Learn about your real spiritual heritage, page 8

Pages: << 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 112 times

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 02:27 PM by visible_villain

reply to post by Malcram

The only person here making a big issue over the use of the word Aryan, is you.

If that were the case my criticism would not have 'rattled your cage'.

Clearly you are the one making it into an 'issue.' I mentioned several other points as well, which are just as 'critical' yet you choose to play the 'Aryan card.'

Thanks for sharing though ...

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 02:40 PM by visible_villain

reply to post by Manawydan

This is an interesting find upon which I would like to expand a bit if I may, pointing you to the Vinca script presumably from around 6000 BCE. It is as yet, not proven as a writing system, but is interesting to note that whatever it is it contains several depictions of the symbol "swastika" and strangely enough an encircled "christian cross".

I appreciate the information.

Let me say this -- that I myself have seen enough 'direct evidence' of the source of 'all civilization' to be of 'Indian origin' that I don't need to see any more evidence .

During the years I lived there I began to see that the Indian view of 'history' is just about exactly '180-out' from the 'western' view. It was a real 'eye opener.' It was at this point that I really started 'waking up' to the actuality of 'revisionist history' and then from there the 'all encompassing' effects of 'state propaganda' delivered through the mass media - by all nations, etc, etc ...

Also, to the best of what I can tell, Indian history goes back at least 200,000 years ...

In my mind the source of the 'diverse cultures' in today's world is beyond dispute.

What is critical, IMHO is that those who are 'prepared' do whatever they can to 'address' the 'critical issue' of 'the blind leading the blind.'

We are currently headed into the 'abyss,' yet I am convinced that those who are 'taking the war' to where it 'belongs' can change this outcome ...

The solution is amazingly simple, yet not at all 'easy' ...

Kind regards , vv

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 02:41 PM by DangerDeath

reply to post by Manawydan

This is an interesting find upon which I would like to expand a bit if I may, pointing you to the Vinca script presumably from around 6000 BCE. It is as yet, not proven as a writing system, but is interesting to note that whatever it is it contains several depictions of the symbol "swastika" and strangely enough an encircled "christian cross".

For instance, Etruscan alphabet from around 1.000 BC has all its signs from Vincan (proto) alphabet.

Phoenician alphabet is also originally from Vincan script, it was brought to Palestine by Pelasti (Pelasgi), who inhabited territory of Greece and Macedonia. They were known also as Philistines, and Palestine is named after them. So this scripture first came to Palestine, and Greeks took Phoenician alphabet later for their own use, but it actually is derived from the Balkan (Vincan) tradition, not from the Middle East as is (was) thought.

Runic alphabet is also originating from the same tradition, runic scripts have been found in Slovakia, much older than it is normally believed this script to be. Most European alphabets originate from Vinca (near Belgrade, at the Danube river).

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 02:54 PM by Indigo_Child

You and I do share some common ground in this matter of these 'old teachings.' I am convinced, as you obviously are, that this 'ancient wisdom,' codified in the Vedas and the resultant deriviate literature of 'Mother India' is a treasure trove of valid knowledge, the correct application of which would greatly benefit the lost and confused masses of people, 'blind from birth,' as it were, who wander without direction in today's darkening world.

Yes, I do think we share a lot of common ground. Perhaps we should focus on what we share, than what we don't share.

The Aryans are history - please 'get over it' ...

Are you familiar with Heidigger? The past is now. It cannot be the past, if we know about it today. History exists for our viewing. I can go back to any time period I want by reading in books, watching documentaries and films.

Just because the word Aryan has been corrupted by the Nazis, does not mean we cannot reclaim and restore the word. If somebody corrupted your surname, would you change your surname, just because people attach negative connotations to it? You probably wouldn't, and why should you?

The nature of connotations is transient. They are changing all the time. Yesteryday something is good, today it is bad, tomorrow it is good again. So we cannot allow the connotations people attach to words to dictate what a word means.

Words have denotative meanings, especially Sanskrit words, which based on an exact science of word construction. The word Aryan based on its denotative meaning means "Noble" This has always been its denotation, and though connotations may change from time to time, person to person, they do not change its denotation.

The word Aryan represents an entire heritage of our past, a noble and enlightened heritage. The word is too important to be discarded, because it is very much intertwined with the heritage. Do you suggest we discard the Vedas too, because they are associated with the Aryans?

Indeed these 51 syllables are said to be the basis of the Sanskrit alphabet, and this is the 'kernel of truth' in what you have said. But Sanskrit is not the the 'only' language of mantras. I can assure you of this.

If anything, I would say that Sanskrit is the language which is 'best suited' for a description of the 'technology' of mind.

If you mean by Mantra any word which can be repeated, then everything is a mantra. I could repeat the word, "dog" and it will become a Mantra.
The word Mantra is a Sanskrit word, a technical word which denotes a word-device which uses sound arrangements and specific rules of word constructions to interface with the mind. It is a technology and the language of Sanskrit was especially devised to create these word-devices.
There is no other language that can do this. This has been declared by computer scientists themselves. Sanskrit functions like a computer which generates sentences using very exact algorithms. The closest languages that can mimic this capability are formal computer languages.

Sanskrit is such an unimaginably advanced language. It outstrips our computer science, linguitics and formal logic by eons. There is absolutely no comparison.

Again, misleading and unskillfull. Our experience of 'time' is always 'subjective' whether in our 'dreams' or when we are in a 'waking' state.

Is your mind subjective? No actually it isn't. We can predict the behaviour of a mind and study the psychological principles of the mind like a science.
In a dream it is possible for you to live an entire lifetime because time in a dream is fast, you can get married, have kids, and send them off to college in 10 hours of waking life. You cannot do that in real life, because the laws of space-time are different.

However, I never really disputed your main point that waking reality and dream reality are similar. They are, they differ by the differences in space-time, but in actual fact they possess exactly the same quality of temporality and impermenance. There is no reason to believe that waking reality is anymore real than dream reality. They are both as unreal as each other.

This is an unneccessarily confusing description. IMHO, the following is much better -

Brahman projects the phenominal universe. Brahman is the 'light' of the projector which produces an image, unlike the projection on the 2-D screen we are all familiar with as 'movies,' the projection Brahma produces is in 'more than' 2-D.

'Prakriti' is the 'film' in this projector which 'modifies' the 'stainless light' of Brahman to produce these 'images' we all percieve as the 'phenominal universe.'

Yes, I like that description as well. In fact I am very familiar with that descrption and use it myself to describe Brahman. The phenomenal universe is indeed a holographic projection of Brahman, and Prakriti is the substance that modifies the pure light of Brahman and projects it as diverse forms. This is the whole idea behind the field and the knower of the field concept in Samkhya.

My point was that Brahman is different things to different people, depending on what perspective you view Brahman through.

Are you familiar with this famous Vedic statement, "The supreme being is one, the sages call him by various names" Brahman is perfect, Brahman is pure bliss, Brahman is pure knowledge, Brahman is pure light, Brahman is the absolute, Brahman is pure spirit.

Brahman is the highest of the highest you can imagine, and still higher. Your words cannot measure the greatness of the supreme being.

[edit on 27-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 03:18 PM by DangerDeath

reply to post by Indigo_Child

Brahman is the highest of the highest you can imagine, and still higher. Your words cannot measure the greatness of the supreme being.

That is simply because one cannot apply measures on the metaphysical = singularity. It doesn't mean it is so big it cannot be measured. Those scriptures are not very clear in this respect. Using metaphor is very imprecise in philosophical discourse and can cause many misunderstandings (intentionally or unintentionally?).

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 03:43 PM by Malcram

Originally posted by visible_villain
reply to post by Malcram

The only person here making a big issue over the use of the word Aryan, is you.

If that were the case my criticism would not have 'rattled your cage'.

Hardly. It's the fact that it is pretty much only you who is complaining about the use of the word Aryan, and yet you are claiming that the reason it should not be used is that "other people" have a problem with the word. It appears rather that this is your issue which you are trying to insist is everybody else's issue, while you are supposedly just the "messenger" informing us of what supposedly "has to be". And yet there has been no real outcry about using the word Aryan in this thread - except from you - because I think most people are intelligent and mature enough to realize that the word was hijacked in the past, but that it has a legitimate meaning and legitimate use which can be reclaimed. Indigo just made this point excellently.

In fact the very word "German" itself was synonymous with evil, brutality and with 'Nazi' in some parts of the world for a time following WWII, and the name "German" was despised. Should the Germans have changed their name because of this? Of course not! Germany and Germans have a vast history and cultural contribution to the world which also informs the word "German". It would be ridiculous to throw this away based on the vile actions of some within one generation. Time changes the connotations of words, which can be overwritten, or their original meanings reclaimed. This is also true for the word "Aryan".

Clearly you are the one making it into an 'issue.' I mentioned several other points as well, which are just as 'critical' yet you choose to play the 'Aryan card.'

"Aryan card"? What is that supposed to mean? It's your bugbear. As for your other points, while I didn't agree with them all, I was prepared to let them go without comment as I felt they were harmless enough. With this issue however, I felt you were being rather unreasonable in your absolute insistence that a word was forever cursed and it's true significance could never be reclaimed.

[edit on 27-4-2009 by Malcram]

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 03:47 PM by bignick

Click here for more information.

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 04:10 PM by poet1b

It is important that we do in fact return the word and name Aryan to its original meaning, which is the first meaning in the definition of the world, to recognize and celebrate Indo-European culture as the great culture and civilization it once was. It is important to recognize that Aryan culture extended from India to Britain, from Hinduism to the Druids Wiccan views of the world, and recognize their similarities, and all those inbetween. The spirituality of this culture and the wisdom they presented, recognizing female as well as the male, is very important to remember and learn from.

Many want to paint the Aryans as evil, and the source of disharmony in this world. We are portrayed as the descendants of Caine who slew Able, but there is another far more likely scenario. Abrahamic teachings claim that Adam was the first man, the first human, and was kicked out the Garden of Eden. The more likely truth is that Adam was only one of many men who lived in the Garden of Eden, and that Adam was possibly kicked out because he didn't play well with others, possibly because he saw the naked body as sinful. Adam then blamed his fall on his wife, leading to the belief that women should be the subjects of men, and controlled by men.

Europe, China, India, North and South America, Sub-Saharan Africa, The tropical Islands, all beautiful gardens on Earth. Clearly not all of humanity was kicked out of the garden. Most of humanity continued to live in the Garden.

This is a very negative thing to look at, but it should be considered, which brings us to the subject of duality.

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 04:56 PM by poet1b

Duality in the world is very evident, and can be clearly seen in the male and female, positive and negative, high and low, and good and evil. Duality creates the potential which allows energy to flow, which makes them them all one that connects us all and the entire universe. Male and female make up humanity, which is one, and depend on each other for existence. Positive and negative charges make up the potential, voltage of a circuit which allows electrical current to flow, able to drive motors and move things, send signals across the universe. High and low gives us sinusoidal nature or our world, the natural fluctuation of life, the ability to create melodies with music, to see the colors of the spectrum. Good and Evil creates the conflict that makes us choose right or wrong, success or failure, progress or destruction.

Then there is the third aspect, the third dimension; father, mother, child; voltage, current, load; harmony, discord, change; success, failure, understanding. These can be identified with numerous names or philosophies, all of which are interconnected. Of course there are also the higher dimensions which add more and more aspects to the nature of the whole world.

In our existence, the second and third dimensions are the easiest to see, and therefore we tend to dwell on these aspects. The one dimension that unifies them all is harder to see, and far more complicated, probably the hardest dimension of all to understand. The higher dimensions are simply far more complicated for us to perceive, and therefore to understand. All of our understanding must go back to the one, in order for us to put the pieces of the puzzle together.

When you see a table, you see it as it is, in the range of frequency that your eyes are able to detect. When you touch the table, you feel it in the range of frequency that your skin is able to detect. When you slap the table andyour ears hear the sound that the table makes, you hear the vibrations of that table in the range that your ears are capable of detecting. Now, if your senses were able to detect that table at different frequencies, then you would be able to see that table in different perspectives. Maybe your eyes could see in infrared or ultraviolet, Your skin detect the electrical charge of the table, and your ears hear its natural vibrating frequency at another level.

Now if you were to change that table in some way, it would change not only from the perspectives from which you are able to perceive the table, but in all perspectives, even those ways which you do not see. This is very important, because what this demonstrates is that for every action there is a reaction, that what you do in this physical plane effects all the plains.

Well, this is what I learn from my spiritual heritage, or what I have managed to learn from my studies.

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 07:00 PM by VitriolAndAngst

reply to post by Indigo_Child

Interesting stuff.

I agree with the idea of retreating to meditate as sophistry.

If the only purpose is meditation and rejoining the divine -- then why have life at all?

Ultimate knowledge or enlightenment -- should that really be the goal? Isn't it good enough that people become just plane decent and helpful to each other?

If you mediate deeper, and get more enlightened, in the scheme of things, is this more important than helping a sick child?

Maybe life is the escape from ultimate power and useless navel gazing. It could be a video game with real consequences -- but at least to us, it is real. As Descartes said; "I think, therefore I am." It's not a real proof, but an ultimate pragmatism; if I have to exist in life, I might as well accept it at face value.

There is a use to insight and wisdom, but you should strive for the truth, regardless. No one path is THE answer.

I'm a Unitarian, but I like the Taoist especially, everybody has some useful insights in their religions, and a good portion of nonsense.

There are no good excuses to hurt people (except by doing so, you prevent more harm). There is no glory in neglect. Nobody should be idolized or have an absolute path, perfect mantra or truth. Life is experiential and you can't encompass all of it. Some people like Frogs, some people Butterflies.

But I also reject that you cannot have critical thinking. You try and make the best judgement that this is good or that is bad and keep an open mind. Accept whatever makes more sense and try to disprove your own believes -- let the best idea win. The concept that FAITH in an idea, is somehow good, and you should ignore other ideas is poisonous -- it is FAITH in love and people that Jesus was talking about. You must have faith that being good to others will inspire it back ..... but don't allow yourself to become a welcome matt, because mistreating you, or allowing others to do it, is not a recognition of yourself, nor good for that other person.

You see -- there aren't any absolutes in these ideas. It's difficult and always requires judgement and imperfect choices. When in doubt; do no harm. Bend over backwards to respect others but don't break your back doing it.

>> I'll have to read more about this Vedic/Aryan path.

It was clear that Hitler was a Christian, and that he distorted a lot of junk. But ultimately, they were fundamentalists who thought they could do no wrong. It's more important, however, to find the Straussian philosophies and perhaps the powers behind the thrown. This position is 180 degrees different from what I learned as a kid.

So it is a struggle. People want it easy, but in the real world, very few people are paid to tell you the truth, and the lie gives it's messenger's a fortune. You cannot depend merely on "gut feeling" nor on logic. Both need to constantly provide checks and balances for the other. But more importantly, none should supersede ethics and setting a good example. You can't be too kind but you can be too unkind. I believe it's best to err on the side of being a kind fool, rather than being a winner who was never gracious.

Life is not a race. There are no winners but there are losers. Don't be in such a hurry to "move to the higher plane." Your goal in this life, should be to live it as best you can based upon the reality you are presented with. Otherwise you are chasing shadows and mists, stabbing at hidden dragons. Does anyone pray to not be hit by a bus in the middle of the street, or do they move out of the way of traffic? In a higher reality, there is no street or bus, but why would the universe conspire to lie to you on a fundamental level?

>> Such grandiose talk by me, inspired by flowery speech. Anyway, it's fun and I hope everyone gets a bit more out of it.

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 07:53 PM by The Killah29

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
reply to post by The Killah29

I hate to dishearten you though, these abilities require innumerable life times of spiritual development. You literally must evolve to the point of becoming a demi-god before you can have the true god-like abilities.

How the darn am I going to do that? Would it also work if I can become immortal, hypothetically?

By the way, I have heard of the indigo children (and believe to be one myself). Is that where you got your name?

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 07:54 PM by VitriolAndAngst

Originally posted by visible_villain
reply to post by Malcram

The only person here making a big issue over the use of the word Aryan, is you.

If that were the case my criticism would not have 'rattled your cage'.

Clearly you are the one making it into an 'issue.' I mentioned several other points as well, which are just as 'critical' yet you choose to play the 'Aryan card.'

Thanks for sharing though ...

I find this discussion informative.

How would I be able to understand the history of the Vedic, if I didn't understand what Aryan meant? A child, might find a word magical, and not be able to deal with a new meaning for the same word -- but I don't think many of those people are going to be here on this blog, going much beyond; "This is an abomination and evil..." based upon some rhetoric they know and apply with equal relish to any teaching that is not their "ONE TRUE WAY." The one marked with the "dead end."

I remember debating my father-in-law about Obama's chances of winning the election. I said; "I can't vote for Hillary, because I KNOW her and Bill to be Republican-light, and I think we have to move to more real Progressive ways. Obama, at least, seems to be a change from that, and at the very least, he isn't Hillary or John McCain." Such was my low expectations since I much preferred Dennis Kucinich.

Anyway, my father-in-law replied; "But Obama can't get elected. People have a problem with electing a black man."

"Right," I said, "and every last one of those people is already voting Republican." I didn't know that there were SOME Hillary supporters who were never going to-- but that wasn't a significant amount.

The real point here is; It was my father-in-law that had a problem with voting for Obama. Sure, it there are people who have a problem with the ethnicity, but people who don't, aren't going to just go with Hillary. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy if you expect nobody is going to rise to the occasion.

You have to have faith, that people can deal with a concept head on, because if you don't, you reinforce that they won't.

"We can't speak to our enemies" is a great excuse for not speaking to enemies -- but it also never allows for them to NOT be enemies.

It's an easier task to rediscover the true meaning of a word, than to adopt a new, unrelated word. How can you become wiser to propaganda and false histories otherwise? It's a great lesson to learn.

>> Did you know Absinthe is now legal and doesn't make people crazy? Apparently, it was propaganda pushed by some French wineries based upon one anecdotal case of someone getting drunk on Absinthe and killing his wife -- irrespective of the million cases of this happening after drinking too much booze.

Even now; Liberal is not a dirty word anymore. You never lose if you never quit. Let Indigo have his word -- I don't think its a good strategy to avoid it, though it is going to be off-putting to people who pre-judge, but they would never bother to learn anything about this anyway.

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 08:10 PM by VitriolAndAngst

Originally posted by The Killah29

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
reply to post by The Killah29

I hate to dishearten you though, these abilities require innumerable life times of spiritual development. You literally must evolve to the point of becoming a demi-god before you can have the true god-like abilities.

How the darn am I going to do that? Would it also work if I can become immortal, hypothetically?

By the way, I have heard of the indigo children (and believe to be one myself). Is that where you got your name?

Some lady I've been working with, who is a self-professed spiritual guide told me I was an Indigo. I had to look it up. My son, she said was crystal.

>> I'm hoping for science and technology to jump-start us on the path rather than waiting for all that reincarnation. If the spiritual ultimately exists -- then it can become the provence of science. I don't believe in a mystical universe myself -- merely one where things are not understood.

I don't think being all science or all spiritual is a good tactic -- one should inform the other. Neither all Yin or all Yang is "better" than the other. The problem I find with people who want everything to be spiritual, is that they have no yardstick. Sometimes this comes from a fear of being judged. If you have all these nebulous feelings, you can get on AboveTopSecret and say; "I feel like there is a being that is crossing the dimensions, and that it's going to stop our efforts to clean up the environment." How do you even deal with this knowledge or act on it, on the unlikely event that such a home-schooled sage of the Universe were correct?

It's a common problem I find here. There is some interesting stuff the comes out, that wouldn't get the time of day on a website like Slashdot or Digg, one needing too much proof to speculate, and the other not spending the time on more than two sentences before making a witty crack about your parentage.

But ALL creative inspiration and mysticism, is a dead-end I believe. It's great to say; "Watch out folks, these chem-trails could be pacifying the population." It's another to dismiss someone who has the chemical analysis of the chem trail in question, who can explain its harmless vapor, created by the heat and pressure of the jet engine mixing with the colder, moist air around the plane.

On the other hand; I find a connection between Autism, mercury and immunizations. There isn't enough investigation of this concern so far, beyond a lot of money dumped into ridiculing it outright. So, there needs to be a forum to bring up concerns without being shot down. Person 1, 2 and 3 might have every reason to believe it's junk rumor, and person #4 might have some evidence nobody thought to look for.

>> Anyway, I think that EVERYTHING in this Universe is ultimately explainable. If it's a mystical event -- that is REAL, then it is just imperfectly understood. But before you can understand it, the concept has to get out there.

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 09:31 PM by visible_villain

reply to post by Indigo_Child

First of all, let me say it's a pleasure to see your reply ( even though I now see you've edited that part out - but that's ok ) , and somehow, I'm not sure why, it's an honor. Entirely 'subjective,' I know, but that's just way my mind works.

It responds to 'stimuli,' really, 'just like a machine,' as it were. Admittedly, I believe this 'machine' 'runs' on the 'power' provided, deep, deep down, beneath all its 'gears' and 'levers' and 'wound up springs,' etc, that is to say, 'all its conditioning' and 'habit energy,' indeed beneath all its many 'addictions,' by the 'illumination' of 'primordial mind,' or that 'buddha nature' which we all have, but my 'instrumentation,' all this 'mental machinery,' sort of 'runs on its own intertia' and usually always 'obscures,' or 'modifies,' or 'defiles,' the 'pristine purity' of that 'primordial light'.

Yes, my 'mirror' is 'more than dusty' ... but, I digress ...

You said :
Are you familiar with Heidigger?

Well, no, I wasn't, so I had to look it up.

And so I did ...

So, I am guessing here that you refer to his assertion that our 'modern' notions of 'being' are faulty because they are based on faulty assumptions.

If this is the case, then I couldn't agree more.

That being said, my 'philosophical authorities' lie in rather a different 'neck of the woods' ...

You said :
The past is now. It cannot be the past, if we know about it today.

My apologies, but this is easily refuted on the following basis -

In the same way that the color 'blue' differs from the color 'red', and so two distinct conceptions are needed because of this difference, so the 'past' must also differ from the 'present' since these 'two times' are also designated by two different conceptions.

Perhaps what you intended to say was -

Our recollection of the past occurs in the present.

Not sure, but that would seem to make sense ...

You said :
I can go back to any time period I want by reading in books, watching documentaries and films.

By reading books and watching films one learns only what somebody else has said about those former times. Sometimes these 'histories' are 'truthful' sometimes they are not - you decide ...

You said :
Just because the word Aryan has been corrupted by the Nazis, does not mean we cannot reclaim and restore the word. If somebody corrupted your surname, would you change your surname, just because people attach negative connotations to it? You probably wouldn't, and why should you?

My point is that in today's 'western mind' the term is 'poison,' or indeed as you say, "corrupted."

Just as the 'accidents of history' may cause the course of a river to move from one location to another, so also has the 'meaning' of this term changed in the 'western mind.'

One may assemble the squadrons of earth-movers and legions of laborers and the funding and the time to 'restore' the riverbed from its 'new' location back to where it 'used to be,' but why ?

It is where it is. It's not your fault.

Now, one may see the restoral of this 'landscape' to its former 'configuration' as one's 'vocation,' or 'higher calling,' if you will.

But, again, I ask, "Why?"

Life is short - there may be more 'productive' 'endeavors' one might direct his resources and his efforts toward ...

You said :
If you mean by Mantra any word which can be repeated ...

I used the term in the same sense I had assumed you had used it -

Mantra

... a sound, syllable, word, or group of words that are considered capable of "creating [modifications]" ...

Source : Wikipedia

You said :
Sanskrit is such an unimaginably advanced language. It outstrips our computer science, linguitics and formal logic by eons. There is absolutely no comparison.

Although I detect a hint of 'irrational exhuberance' here, suffice it to say that IMHO, I consider it unlikely in the extreme that a tribe of primitive cavemen, only recently 'jumped down' from 'out of the trees,' could possibly have invented this remarkable language - without 'a little outside help' ...

You can 'follow that thought' anywhere it seems to lead -- let's just stop here and 'not go there,' for the time being ...

You said :
Is your mind subjective? No actually it isn't.

Well, people tend to be pretty opinionated about this, but here's how I look at it -

Ask 100 people, "Which way is up ?" and you may very well get 125 different answers.

Obviously the mind is subjective.

You said :
I never really disputed your main point that waking reality and dream reality are similar.

Well, actually my 'main point' is that there's already enough 'sectarian conflict' in the world, and time 'is short.'

But, it's good to hear something I've said makes sense to somebody ...

You said :
Are you familiar with this famous Vedic statement, "The supreme being is one, the sages call him by various names" Brahman is perfect, Brahman is pure bliss, Brahman is pure knowledge, Brahman is pure light, Brahman is the absolute, Brahman is pure spirit.

I guess I've heard statements like that.

The one which 'suits my fancy' best is -

When we eat it's like Brahman feeding Brahman with Brahman.

You said :
Brahman is the highest of the highest you can imagine, and still higher. Your words cannot measure the greatness of the supreme being.

I would tend to agree to a certain extent, however according to the Hindus, Brahman is 'trumped' by Vishnu who 'in turn' is himself 'trumped' by Shiva. Maybe this is a 'sectarian difference of opinion' - I guess it could be ...

In closing, a note of hope -

Source : Google Books

reply posted on 27-4-2009 @ 09:55 PM by arbiture

reply to post by hezekiah

What bothers me about those who blame any ethnic group for all the problems society faces is it precludes having to find real solutions to complicated problems. This was by no means unique to the NAZI's. At the same time in Japan, Japanese propaganda convinced its people they were the only true civilized society. The rest of us were barbarians. This thinking encouraged such things as brutal treatment of prisoners, the rape of Nanking, etc. The tendency to blaim an identifiable ethnic group for problems goes back as far as history does. Its also so easy. As for the book on WW-2 you forwarded on the video, are you saying the author and all of time life diden't like Hitler because they were Jewish. Some of that is understandable, given what happend to the Jews under Hitler. The Jews have always been some of histories favorite bad guys. Their customs were different then the majority of any cosmopolitan culture, every thing from dietary preferences, to the way they dressed, and certain religous customs, and a tendency to self segragate from the rest of the non-JEWS, from the great unwashed. As in us (me a WASP in that case), any nonconformaty FROM A GROUP OR INDIVIDUAL, enhanced by hysteria could have dire consequences.

I judge any book on what it says, not who wrote it. As far as "racial purity" is concerned givin the well documented geological events of 70,000 years ago when the super volcano of toba erupted, that reduced by estimate the entire human race to amount 30 reproducing couples. It comes down to the true differences among us were limited to being skin deep having adapted to varied environments by only being skin deep.

As for the book on WW-2 mentioned in the vidio, the problems in 1920's Germany that led to the rise of Hitler were caused largely by the crippling economic and social unrest of the 1920's. The punitive Versails treaty had left Germany with little in the way of an industrial base, and the need to pay France obscene war repreperations. The rise of a Hitler with simple enemys to rally his people around seemed inevitable. On the surface the French government were claiming to prevent the Germans from becoming a military threat again. In reality, they were concerned with the Germans once again being an economic power that would rival France.

The reasons socioeconomic problems exist can not be boiled down to one ethnic group or anouther having a grand conspiracy against the rest of us.
To quote Shakespare, our fault is not in our stars, but in ourselfes.

reply posted on 28-4-2009 @ 05:07 PM by Indigo_Child

My apologies, but this is easily refuted on the following basis -

In the same way that the color 'blue' differs from the color 'red', and so two distinct conceptions are needed because of this difference, so the 'past' must also differ from the 'present' since these 'two times' are also designated by two different conceptions.

Perhaps what you intended to say was -

Our recollection of the past occurs in the present.

Not sure, but that would seem to make sense ...

The past and the future are always relative to the present, they have no real existence of their own. In the past it was present, and in the future it will be present. There only ever is the present. The past and the future are just possible presents, and being possibilities, one can know the past and the future from the present. As indeed the past and the future are contingent on the present anyway.

In the quantum domain all pasts and all future i.e., all possibilities are happening at once within the present, and no such thing as time exists.
Therefore it makes no difference what our history was, and what our future based on that history is, we have the power to choose any present we wish because we are free agents outside of time.

So your argument that the Aryan meaning corrupted in recent times makes no difference to the present meaning. Its denotative meaning has always been the same "noble" for thousands of years and that that takes precedence with me, and it sounds like with most people posting in this thread. You seem to be the only one complaining about the recent meaning, which you treat as if it were fixed forever. It is not fixed, it had a positive meaning for thousands of years, then in the last century it acquired a negative meaning, and again it seems to have acquired a positive meaning again. In fact in Hindu culture its meaning never changed.

My point is that in today's 'western mind' the term is 'poison,' or indeed as you say, "corrupted."

You are portraying the Western mind as a very closed, uncomprimising and ignorant mind. So you are saying that once the Western mind has decided on something, they will never change their mind on it. You should speak for yourself, many people posting in this thread are Western, and they have no problem with the word Aryan because they know the context it is used in and the proper definition of it.

It is sad that you are saying that once a mind is made up, it cannot go back to a previous state. That is like saying, "Once a criminal always a criminal" That is if one is not a criminal, then becomes a criminal, then they cannot become not a criminal again. This is absurd. All you are betraying to us is that you have a very closed mind, and many on this thread don't share your mindset.

I think you need to stop speaking on behalf of others, and start speaking for yourself. It is you that has a problem with the word Aryan, make that clear and don't go speaking for others.

You can 'follow that thought' anywhere it seems to lead -- let's just stop here and 'not go there,' for the time being ...

Sanskrit is said to a be non-human language. Make of that what you will, I already know what it means.

Ask 100 people, "Which way is up ?" and you may very well get 125 different answers.

Right, but I bet you that I can predict based on knowing a person's history, what they will say. This has been demonstrated in Psychology, we can predict a person's behaviour and manipulate it. It has not reached exactness, but we can say what is likely behaviour and what is unlikely behaviour given certain factors. Pavlov and Skinner have already demonstrated how using SR conditioning they can train subjects to behave in particular ways.

Thus the mind being subjective is false. It can be predicted and controlled just like any object. In actual fact the subjective and objective dichotomy is a false dichotmy. There is no such thing as either subject or object. The only thing that is real is being. Only Brahman is real.

I would tend to agree to a certain extent, however according to the Hindus, Brahman is 'trumped' by Vishnu who 'in turn' is himself 'trumped' by Shiva. Maybe this is a 'sectarian difference of opinion' - I guess it could be ...

No, you are mistaking Brahma with Brahman. Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva are spirits of creation, preservation and destruction and they are only at work within the manifest universe. They are Sadguna Brahman, Brahman as manifest in phenomenon. Outside of the manifest universe is Nirguna Brahma, Brahman which is beyond description. This is Brahman in it's absolute being.

There is nothing higher than Brahman.

[edit on 28-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

[edit on 28-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

reply posted on 28-4-2009 @ 05:34 PM by jkrog08

reply to post by Indigo_Child

I can agree with your statement in your last post when you said "time does not exist".Because like you said, quantum theory states all possibilities is happening at once.So the past is both entirely reliant on actions taken in the present,but also on actions potentialy taken in the future.So in that statement one would conclude that what you said is infact true and the only thing that is changable is the 'present' time frame.Of course we are left with the future and that is like the past but the reciprical of it.The future is entirely dependent on actions in the past,while dependent on the present,which is dependent on the past.I hope that made sense.IMO,'time' is nothing more then movement in space(ie;particles moving,persons moving,planets moving,etc)w/o movement there is no time IMO.So indeed it is quantum movement at the root of what we call "time".

I have a question for you;why would such an advanced idealogy and race allow themselves to become corrupted and destroyed like they obviouslly have been?(did you get my u2u,I asked you some more questions there)

reply posted on 28-4-2009 @ 05:58 PM by Indigo_Child

reply to post by jkrog08

It is not the Aryan race that destroyed themselves, it was time that destroyed them, the destroyer of all. It is a fact that everything in this universe will be destroyed by time when their cycle ends. Let's just say the Aryan cycle ended and the Abrahamic cycle begun. Now it is our duty as the descendents of the Aryan to end the Abrahamic cycle and restart the Aryan cycle.

The noble and enlightened ones must again take control of the planet and the golden age will once again begin.

[edit on 28-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

reply posted on 29-4-2009 @ 07:37 AM by awake1234