On the subject of Vimanas, I see huge flying vehicles in Mahabharata. For example,
I wouldn't have ventured this far if it hadn't been for other tidbits in the video that
immediately set off alarms, such as Mr. White's instance that the Mahabharata's references to
something like the channeled vimanas mentioned in newer books, only referred to flying
palaces; some sort of fanciful, non-technological vehicles. I had been studying the subject
at one point and had found references in the Mahabharata, that were not from the later
channeled data, nor were they called vimanas, but they did have some kind of technology and
could fly. These were what Mr. White called, flying palaces. I found one reference, for
example, to a flying city that was considered impregnable, which is then shot out of the sky
during an aerial battle, falling into the sea. It seems the text also references something
called a "car" and this car, can fly. In fact, one guy escapes into the sky in a flying car.
And perhaps the most interesting one is:
The Mahabharata: Drona Parva
"Naikartana, was now hurled at the Rakshasa. Beholding that excellent and blazing weapon
capable of piercing the body of every foe, in the hands of the Suta's son, the Rakshasa began
to fly away in fear assuming a body gigantic as the foot of the Vindhya mountains. Indeed,
seeing that dart in Karna's hand, all creatures in the sky, O king, uttered loud cries.
Fierce winds began to blow, and thunders with loud report began to fall on the earth.
Destroying that blazing illusion of Ghatotkacha and piercing right through his breast that
resplendent dart soared aloft in the night and entered a starry constellation in the
Naikartana was apparently a blazing missile (it's interchangeably called a dart and a missile
in previous passages in this section). But look what happens when it's launched at Rakshasha
(Ghatotkacha's ship). Creatures in the sky make loud sounds, fierce wind begins to blow,
thunders fall on the earth. (sounds like a rocket launch to me). And the strangest part, it
destroys the "illusion" of Ghatotkacha. What kind of illusion? Early in the same passages, he
suddenly vanishes while in flight in his car and beats his enemies in a "deceiful" way.
Thus, he's flying around in a vehicle that disappears. The illusion itseelf was like a
cloaking technology of some kind that made his flying vehicle, Rakshasha, invisible.
Followed up by the special weapon, Naikartana, that finds and pierces him and his invisible
flying car, causing the illusion to drop and the car to crash to the ground. In spite of
the fact this type of information is often imbedded in what sounds like mundane old world
ground battles with horses and arrows and maces, it will suddenly launch into advanced aerial
battles in horseless cars, with heat seeking missiles and cloaking technology for cars the
size of mountains and cities. For all its fanciful parts, there are sections interspersed
through out, that just scream high technology.
On the subject of ufos appearing in mideval art, I was not particularly thrilled with White's
explanation of the shepherd and dog scenes in which an object containing a star/angel/cloud/
appears and in which ufology researchers, see an ufo. Neither was I enamored with his
description of the "laser beam anunciation" or his glossing over of the Ezekiel 1 vehicle.
I don't think White's argument that angelic or star related references, particularly embedded
in clouds in the sky, contain enough evidence against sentient, flying vehicles, unless he
means to say no sentient beings were present with the star of Bethlehem. Since Mr. White
wasn't present at the time, he really has no way of knowing what the wise men saw other than
a star that moved uncharacteriscally across the sky. Considering stars and angels were used
interchangeably in the text, it's unlikely we have enough information in this particular part
of the story, to say for certain. Same holds true for the "laser beam anunciation," in which
tiny winged angels encircle a beam of light. It appears the artist is attempting to depict
the same vehicle of Jehovah mentioned in Ezekiel 1, which is held aloft by "wheel within a
Some of the other examples he listed, are very convincing, but the shepherd with dog, laser
beam anunciation and Ezekiel 1, examples, are not. It is not the fault of the rest of the
known world that catholic depictions of events are romanized. For example, the laser beam
anunciation has cupid like angels but if you look at Ezekiel 1, those are not chubby little
angelic babies. To illustrate what I mean see this video
Having read Mr. Heiser's argument regarding the Ezekiel 1 vehicle, years ago, I can state
most emphatically, that he has over simplified the information. For example, the entrance of
the vehicle in Ezekiel's vision is curious. Why does the sky "open"? Why all the fire coming
out of the hole in the sky? That's odd, doncha think? Why the eyes in the wheels? Do
chariot wheels have eyes in them? Why the metallic coverings of the angels? Why the
lightning fast flight from one side of the sky to the other? There are many questions that
remain unanswered that could seriously push the event from being a mundane reference of the
Earth against the back drop of the ecliptic with Jehovah depicted as controlling the passage
of time events of heaven, to something much bigger. To ignore those details because you
don't know what they are and then state that you know what the entire event is not, is
putting the cart before the horse. We can safely say we know it's 1) in the heavens, 2)
related to travel in the sky in relation to time, 3) metallic and some other substance that's
likened to sapphire, 4) someone who has the likeness of Jehovah is on the main platform which
supports a "throne" (is that like the throne Joseph ascends in his ladder dream?). White has
collected several good references but then ignores large parts of those references, in order
to maintain the position that they are just mundane artistic devices. I don't think so.
Although I greatly admire Mr. Heiser, this is one area where I think he's wrong, specifically
on the over simplification of a major event. More research required.
And lastly, I'm an ardent researher of ancient Sumer. Every source I look at says "An" or
"Anu" is sky or heaven. So I think "princely blood" is another example of over simplifying
the information. In effect, it would seem to more accurately say, "sons of the sky god, Anu
and Ki" or even "sons of heaven and earth." I realize it's tempting to make the bizaare more
familar and vice-a-versa, but let's just stick with the information and do it justice.
Neither side of this debate can claim the superior position if they don't take the whole
picture into consideration.
Furthermore, if the sons of Anu were created in the heavens, it seems logical to suggest they
weren't created on Earth and if they weren't created on Earth, how'd they get to Earth (ki)?
Remember, Earth = Ki. If it was just a reference to the coupling of heaven and earth, does
that mean the Anunnaki are just little baby earths running around out there in the heavens
and if so, how does that make them princely blood? Something is missing, like how the
princely blood thing gets from the heavens to the earth. Things that.....
edit on 9-12-2012 by undo because: (no reason given)
edit on 3/14/2013 by Blaine91555 because: (no reason given)